Hi Alasdair, Mikulas, On 2009/04/17 22:22 +0900, Alasdair G Kergon wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 01:57:02PM +0900, Kiyoshi Ueda wrote: >> 1. The semantics of flush suspend has been changed. > > We absolutely must complete any I/O issued as a result of the lock_fs() > call in dm_suspend(). I think that lock_fs() waits for I/O to complete, so no semantics change in case of LOCKFS && FLUSH. (All I/O issued from lock_fs() are flushed.) But in case of NO_LOCKFS && FLUSH, the semantics is changed: from: I/Os submitted before the suspend invocation are flushed to: I/Os submitted even before the suspend invocation may not be flushed I have no idea whether someone gets real damage by this semantics change. > Alasdair Thanks, Kiyoshi Ueda -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
