[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/7] Adding support to freeze and unfreeze a journal
    > > Hrm let me think through this a little more; we actually do:
    > >
    > > t16) ext4_journal_start()
    > >   t17) ext4_journal_start_sb()
    > >     t18) handle = ext4_journal_current_handle();
    > >     t19) if (!handle) vfs_check_frozen()
    > >     t20) ... jbd2_journal_start()
    >  Ah, right. I forgot.
    > > So actually we *do* block new handles, but let *existing* ones
    > > continue (see commits 6b0310fbf087ad6e9e3b8392adca97cd77184084
    > > and be4f27d324e8ddd57cc0d4d604fe85ee0425cba9)
    > >
    > > So your assertion that a new handle is started is incorrect
    > > in general, isn't it?  So then does the fix seem necessary?
    > > Or, at least, in the fashion below - maybe we need to just make
    > > sure all started handles complete before the unlock_updates?
    > > Or am I missing something...?
    >  Well, the problem with running operations and freezing is more
    > fundamental I believe. See my email
    > So I believe we'll need some better exclusion mechanism already in VFS.
    >                                                                Honza

    If all the write operations were journaled, then this patch would not
    allow ext4 filesystem to have any dirty data after its frozen.
    (as journal_start() would block).

    I think the only one candidate that creates dirty data without
    calling ext4_journal_start() is mmapped?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2012-01-10 22:57    [W:0.020 / U:13.376 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site