On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 7:40 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 03:38:41PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> > Sorry for the late reply but now when thinking about the patch I don't
>> > think it is quite right. Writeback can happen from other contexts than just
>> > the worker
Hello,
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 03:38:41PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > Sorry for the late reply but now when thinking about the patch I don't
> > think it is quite right. Writeback can happen from other contexts than just
> > the worker one (e.g. kswapd can do writeback, or in some out-of-memor
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri 17-06-16 12:04:05, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> 43d1c0eb7e11 ("block: detach bdev inode from its wb in
>> __blkdev_put()") detached bdev inode from its wb as the bdev inode may
>> outlive the underlying bdi and thus the wb. This is accompli
Hi,
On Fri 17-06-16 12:04:05, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 43d1c0eb7e11 ("block: detach bdev inode from its wb in
> __blkdev_put()") detached bdev inode from its wb as the bdev inode may
> outlive the underlying bdi and thus the wb. This is accomplished by
> invoking inode_detach_wb() from __blkdev_put();
4 matches
Mail list logo