lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH] Fix queueing work if !bdi_cap_writeback_dirty()
Date

If bdi has BDI_CAP_NO_WRITEBACK, bdi_forker_thread() doesn't start
writeback thread. This means there is no consumer of work item made
by bdi_queue_work().

This adds to checking of !bdi_cap_writeback_dirty(sb->s_bdi) before
calling bdi_queue_work(), otherwise queued work never be consumed.

Signed-off-by: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
---

fs/fs-writeback.c | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff -puN fs/fs-writeback.c~noop_backing_dev_info-check-fix fs/fs-writeback.c
--- linux/fs/fs-writeback.c~noop_backing_dev_info-check-fix 2012-09-11 06:12:30.000000000 +0900
+++ linux-hirofumi/fs/fs-writeback.c 2012-09-11 06:12:30.000000000 +0900
@@ -120,6 +120,9 @@ __bdi_start_writeback(struct backing_dev
{
struct wb_writeback_work *work;

+ if (!bdi_cap_writeback_dirty(bdi))
+ return;
+
/*
* This is WB_SYNC_NONE writeback, so if allocation fails just
* wakeup the thread for old dirty data writeback
@@ -1310,7 +1313,7 @@ void writeback_inodes_sb_nr(struct super
.reason = reason,
};

- if (sb->s_bdi == &noop_backing_dev_info)
+ if (!bdi_cap_writeback_dirty(sb->s_bdi))
return;
WARN_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&sb->s_umount));
bdi_queue_work(sb->s_bdi, &work);
@@ -1396,7 +1399,7 @@ void sync_inodes_sb(struct super_block *
};

/* Nothing to do? */
- if (sb->s_bdi == &noop_backing_dev_info)
+ if (!bdi_cap_writeback_dirty(sb->s_bdi))
return;
WARN_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&sb->s_umount));

_
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-11 21:01    [W:0.124 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site