lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 09/11] writeback: separate starting of sync vs opportunistic writeback
On Wed, Sep 16 2009, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 15-09-09 20:16:55, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > bdi_start_writeback() is currently split into two paths, one for
> > WB_SYNC_NONE and one for WB_SYNC_ALL. Add bdi_sync_writeback()
> > for WB_SYNC_ALL writeback and let bdi_start_writeback() handle
> > only WB_SYNC_NONE.
> >
> > Push down the writeback_control allocation and only accept the
> > parameters that make sense for each function. This cleans up
> > the API considerably.
> Nice cleanup!
>
> > @@ -771,6 +798,8 @@ static long wb_check_old_data_flush(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> > struct wb_writeback_args args = {
> > .nr_pages = nr_pages,
> > .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_NONE,
> > + .for_kupdate = 1,
> > + .range_cyclic = 1,
> > };
> >
> > return wb_writeback(wb, &args);
> This chunk should be in patch number 4.

Yeah, I wonder why that snuck into this one...

--
Jens Axboe



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-16 15:11    [W:0.072 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site