Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | OGAWA Hirofumi <> | Subject | [PATCH] Fix queueing work if !bdi_cap_writeback_dirty() | Date | Wed, 12 Sep 2012 03:28:42 +0900 |
| |
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>
| |