[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch 1/1] Writeback fix for concurrent large and small file writes
    Due to my faux pas of top posting (see I am
    resending this email.

    On Nov 28, 2007 4:34 PM, Fengguang Wu <> wrote:
    > Could you demonstrate the situation? Or if I guess it right, could it
    > be fixed by the following patch? (not a nack: If so, your patch could
    > also be considered as a general purpose improvement, instead of a bug
    > fix.)
    > diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
    > index 0fca820..62e62e2 100644
    > --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
    > +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
    > @@ -301,7 +301,7 @@ __sync_single_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
    > * Someone redirtied the inode while were writing back
    > * the pages.
    > */
    > - redirty_tail(inode);
    > + requeue_io(inode);
    > } else if (atomic_read(&inode->i_count)) {
    > /*
    > * The inode is clean, inuse

    By testing the situation I can confirm that the one line patch above
    fixes the problem.

    I will continue testing some other cases to see if it cause any other
    issues but I don't expect it to.
    I will post this change for 2.6.24 and list Feng as author. If that's
    ok with Feng.

    As for the original patch I will resubmit it for 2.6.25 as a general
    purpose improvement.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-29 21:19    [W:0.022 / U:17.592 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site