On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 01:01:15PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 01:18:15AM +0900, Chris Mason wrote: > > Waiting doesn't make it synchronous from the elevator point of view ;) > > If you're using WB_SYNC_NONE, it's a async write. WB_SYNC_ALL makes it > > a sync write. I only see WB_SYNC_NONE in vmscan.c, so we should be > > using the async congestion wait. (the exception is xfs which always > > does async writes). > > That's only because those people who did the global sweep did not bother > to convert it or even tell the list about it. I have a patch in my > QA queue to change it.. Yes, we just didn't realize XFS was missed. Sorry. I wasn't trying to blame xfs for being behind, just mentioning that we've got about 10 different variables here and I'm having a hard time figuring out which ones to push on. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
