Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 7 Jan 2011 08:10:16 -0500 | From | Christoph Hellwig <> | Subject | Re: [patch 8/8] fs: add i_op->sync_inode |
| |
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 02:29:34AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Btw, there's an easy way how we could get this right, in fact > the write_inode in XFS is already trying to do it, it's just the > caller not copying with it: > > - if we can't get locks for a non-blocking ->write_inode we return > EAGAIN, and the callers sets the dirty bits again.
I just tried to implement this and noticed we're actually doing this inside XFS - if we get our EAGAIN error from the lower level code in ->write_inode we do a manual mark_inode_dirty_sync(). So as far as XFS is concerned ->write_inode always pushes data into a state where ->sync_fs writes it out, or if it was called with WB_SYNC_NONE and couldn't get the locks redirties the inode, and thus is not affected by the issue you mentioned. I think this is also a good model for other filesystems to follow.
| |