[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: linux-xfs
Subject: Re: review [1 of 3]: lazy superblock counters - core kernel
From: David Chinner <dgc () sgi ! com>
Date: 2007-04-24 14:16:24
Message-ID: 20070424141624.GU32602149 () melbourne ! sgi ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 09:51:47AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:28:08AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > > This is really quite nasty. Should we at least force a cache flush here?
> >
> > Ok, so the patch I sent out was an older version that had a very similar
> > name to the current patch in my series (xfs-lazy-sb vs xfs_lazy_sb).
> > This code doesn't exist in the version I should have sent out.
> >
> > The latest version, plus the changes suggested here and with the
> > second patch folded back into it is attached.
>
> Looks like in the new code we simply ignore log reservation
> failures in xfs_log_sbcount?
AFAICT, the only way we can get that error is a fileystem shutdown,
which means we've got an unclean shutdown and so there's no not much
point in syncing the superblock counters because we'll have to
recover them anyway....
> Otherwise this looks good to me.
Thanks for the reviews, Christoph.
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
Principal Engineer
SGI Australian Software Group
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic