lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Design problems caused by bdflush
Hi,

On Wed, 5 Jan 2000 02:32:37 +0000, Jamie Lokier <lkd@tantalophile.demon.co.uk> said:
> A possibly simple change would be another buffer state: "dependent
> dirty". Unlike dirty buffers they are not flushed and they're not on
> the dirty list; instead, they are linked to from an ordinary dirty
> buffer.

> After an ordinary dirty buffer is written or flushed, its "dependent
> dirty" buffers are changed to "dirty" and they will eventually be
> written too. Thus you get a partial write ordering.

We've talked about this sort of thing in the past. Linus is quite
interested in the possibility of adding write ordering for pending
writes or to the writeback queues, but really wants the buffer cache to
lose, not add, functionality. Adding more complexity to the buffer
cache for cases like this just isn't going to be accepted.

--Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans