Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Oct 2005 18:15:49 +0900 | From | "Machida, Hiroyuki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] miss-sync changes on attributes (Re: [PATCH 2/2][FAT] miss-sync issues on sync mount (miss-sync on utime)) |
| |
OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > "Machida, Hiroyuki" <machida@sm.sony.co.jp> writes: > > >>OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: >> >>>Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> writes: >>> >>> >>>>However there's not much point in writing a brand-new function when >>>>write_inode_now() almost does the right thing. We can share the >>>>implementation within fs-writeback.c. >>> >>>Indeed. We use the generic_osync_inode() for it? >> >>Please let me confirm. >>Using generic_osync_inode(inode, NULL, OSYNC_INODE) instaed of >>sync_inode_wodata(inode) is peferable for changes on fs/open.c, >>even it would write data. Is it correct? > > > No, I only thought the interface is good. I don't know why it writes > data pages even if OSYNC_INODE only.
I checked 2.6.13 tree, following functions call generic_osync_inode(). However noone calls it with OSYNC_INODE. SO I can't find intention of it's usage.
Does anyone know why generic_osync_inode() trys to write data page, even if OSYNC_INODE only passed ?
- fs/reiserfs/file.c reiserfs_file_write() OSYNC_METADATA | OSYNC_DATA - mm/filemap.c sync_page_range() OSYNC_METADATA sync_page_range_nolock() OSYNC_METADATA generic_file_direct_write OSYNC_METADATA
-- Hiroyuki Machida machida@sm.sony.co.jp - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |