lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: ext3 IO latency measurements (was: Linux 2.6.29)


On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> Doable but not fairly simple ;) Firstly you have to restart a transaction
> when you've used up all the credits you originally started with (easy),
> secondly ext3 uses lock order PageLock -> "transaction start" which is
> unusable for the scheme you suggest. So we'd have to revert that - which
> needs larger audit of our locking scheme and that's probably the reason
> why noone has done it yet.

It's also not clear that ext3 can really do much better than the regular
generic_writepages() logic. I mean, seriously, what's there to improve on?
The transaction code is all normally totally pointless, and I merged the
patch that avoids it when not necessary.

It might be different if more people used "data=journal", but I don't
doubt that is very common. For data=writeback and data=ordered, I bet
generic_writepages() is as good as anything ext3-specific could be.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-27 23:23    [W:0.019 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site