Jan Kara <j...@suse.cz> writes: >> If flusher is working, it clears dirty flags of inode. But if those >> handers can't flush at the time, we have to do redirty or something to >> prevent the reclaim. > Well, if this is your only problem then I'd see better options than just > disabling flusher thread. If the inability to write inode is rare, then > redirtying seems like a reasonable option (despite I agree it's a bit > ugly). If the inability to write is common, then you'll probably have to do > the dirty inode tracking yourself in some list and expose inodes to VM when > they are ready to be written. Or you handle writing of inodes yourself but > leave writing of pages on flusher thread...
Basically all data can be data-integrity write like data logging, so it would be more than common. And ->writepages() will also ignore WBC_SYNC_NONE. > Because when you disable flusher thread completely you have to put all the > smarts to avoid livelocks, keep fairness among processes, write old data, > keep number of dirty pages under control into your filesystem which leads > to a lot of duplication. I'm not sure what you meant though. What is the difference with ignoring WBC_SYNC_NONE? Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirof...@mail.parknet.co.jp> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
