"NeilBrown" <neilb@xxxxxxx> writes: > congestion_wait() in this context is just a sleep - block devices do not > in general support congestion signalling any more. > > The goal here is to wait for any recently written data to get to > storage. This can be achieved using blkdev_issue_flush(). Purpose of flush option should be for making umount faster, not data integrity. (but current flush implement is strange at several places, IMO) So, I don't think the issue_flush is not proper for it (flush is very slow on some usb thumb), and rather I think it is better off to just remove the congestion_wait(). Thanks. > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> > --- > fs/fat/file.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/fat/file.c b/fs/fat/file.c > index 13855ba49cd9..c50a52f40e37 100644 > --- a/fs/fat/file.c > +++ b/fs/fat/file.c > @@ -175,9 +175,9 @@ long fat_generic_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg) > static int fat_file_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp) > { > if ((filp->f_mode & FMODE_WRITE) && > - MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb)->options.flush) { > + MSDOS_SB(inode->i_sb)->options.flush) { > fat_flush_inodes(inode->i_sb, inode, NULL); > - congestion_wait(BLK_RW_ASYNC, HZ/10); > + blkdev_issue_flush(inode->i_sb->s_bdev); > } > return 0; > } -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>