[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] ext3 data=guarded v5
On Wed, 2009-04-29 at 22:04 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:

> > What we don't want to do is have a call to write() over existing blocks
> > in the file add new things to the data=ordered list. I don't see how we
> > can avoid that without datanew.
> Yes, what I suggest would do exactly that:
> In ordered_writepage() in the beginning we do:
> page_bufs = page_buffers(page);
> if (!walk_page_buffers(NULL, page_bufs, 0, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE,
> NULL, buffer_unmapped)) {
> return block_write_full_page(page, NULL, wbc);
> }
> So we only get to starting a transaction and file some buffers if some buffer
> in the page is unmapped. Write() maps / allocates all buffers in write_begin()
> so they are never added to ordered lists in writepage().

Right, writepage doesn't really need datanew.

> We rely on write_end
> to do it. So the only case where not all buffers in the page are mapped is
> when we have to allocate in writepage() (mmaped write) or the two cases I
> describe above.

But I still think write_end does need datanew. That's where 99% of the
ordered buffers are going to come from when we overwrite the contents of
an existing file.


 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-29 22:41    [W:0.056 / U:2.408 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site