lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
Neil Brown wrote:
> On Friday June 1, dgc@sgi.com wrote:
>
>> On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 02:31:21PM -0400, Phillip Susi wrote:
>>
>>> David Chinner wrote:
>>>
>>>> That sounds like a good idea - we can leave the existing
>>>> WRITE_BARRIER behaviour unchanged and introduce a new WRITE_ORDERED
>>>> behaviour that only guarantees ordering. The filesystem can then
>>>> choose which to use where appropriate....
>>>>
>>> So what if you want a synchronous write, but DON'T care about the order?
>>>
>> submit_bio(WRITE_SYNC, bio);
>>
>> Already there, already used by XFS, JFS and direct I/O.
>>
>
> Are you sure?
>
> You seem to be saying that WRITE_SYNC causes the write to be safe on
> media before the request returns. That isn't my understanding.
> I think (from comments near the definition and a quick grep through
> the code) that WRITE_SYNC expedites the delivery of the request
> through the elevator, but doesn't do anything special about getting it
> onto the media.

My impression is that the sync will return when the i/o has been
delivered to the device, and will get special treatment by the elevator
code (I looked quickly, more is needed). I'm sore someone will tell me
if I misread this. ;-)

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
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: 2007-06-02 01:59    [W:0.223 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site