![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 04 May 2007 10:18:12 +0400 Alex Tomas <alex@clusterfs.com> wrote: > >> Andrew Morton wrote: >>> Yes, there can be issues with needing to allocate journal space within the >>> context of a commit. But >> no-no, this isn't required. we only need to mark pages/blocks within >> transaction, otherwise race is possible when we allocate blocks in transaction, >> then transacton starts to commit, then we mark pages/blocks to be flushed >> before commit. > > I don't understand. Can you please describe the race in more detail? if I understood your idea right, then in data=ordered mode, commit thread writes all dirty mapped blocks before real commit. say, we have two threads: t1 is a thread doing flushing and t2 is a commit thread t1 t2 find dirty inode I find some dirty unallocated blocks journal_start() allocate blocks attach them to I journal_stop() going to commit find inode I dirty do NOT find these blocks because they're allocated only, but pages/bhs aren't mapped to them start commit map pages/bhs to just allocate blocks so, either we mark pages/bhs someway within journal_start()--journal_stop() or commit thread should do lookup for all dirty pages. the latter doesn't sound nice, IMHO. thanks, Alex - 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2007-05-04 06:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||