Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requireme

To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements
From:	Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:32:09 +1000
Cc:	xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<20080626112612.GW4392@parisc-linux.org>
Mail-followup-to:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References:	<1214455277-6387-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1214455277-6387-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20080626112612.GW4392@parisc-linux.org>
Sender:	xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 05:26:12AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 02:41:12PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > XFS object flushing doesn't quite match existing completion semantics.  It
> > mixed exclusive access with completion. That is, we need to mark an object 
> > as
> > being flushed before flushing it to disk, and then block any other attempt 
> > to
> > flush it until the completion occurs.
> 
> This sounds like mutex semantics.  Why are the existing mutexes not
> appropriate for your needs?

Different threads doing wait and complete.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [PATCH 6/6] Clean up stale references to semaphores, (continued) Re: [PATCH 6/6] Clean up stale references to semaphores, Christoph Hellwig [PATCH 4/6] Replace the XFS buf iodone semaphore with a completion, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 4/6] Replace the XFS buf iodone semaphore with a completion, Christoph Hellwig [PATCH 3/6] Replace dquot flush semaphore with a completion, Dave Chinner [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Christoph Hellwig Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Christoph Hellwig Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner <= Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Christoph Hellwig Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Daniel Walker Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Dave Chinner Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Daniel Walker Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Christoph Hellwig

Previous by Date:	Re: Performance problems with millions of inodes, Christoph Litauer
Next by Date:	Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox
Previous by Thread:	Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox
Next by Thread:	Re: [PATCH 1/6] Extend completions to provide XFS object flush requirements, Matthew Wilcox
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]