On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 10:17 -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
> > @@ -1713,7 +1753,31 @@ int journal_try_to_free_buffers(journal_
> > if (buffer_jbd(bh))
> > goto busy;
> > } while ((bh = bh->b_this_page) != head);
> > +
> > ret = try_to_free_buffers(page);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * In the case of concurrent direct IO and buffered IO,
> > + * There are a number of places where we
> > + * could race with journal_commit_transaction(), the later still
> > + * helds the reference to the buffers to free while processing them.
> > + * try_to_free_buffers() failed to free those buffers,
> > + * resulting in an unexpected EIO error
> > + * returns back to the generic_file_direct_IO()
> > + *
> > + * So let's wait for the current transaction finished flush
> > + * dirty data buffers before we try to free those buffers
> > + * again. This wait is needed by direct IO code path only,
> > + * gfp_mask __GFP_REPEAT is passed from the direct IO code
> > + * path to flag if we need to wait and retry free buffers.
> > + */
> > + if (ret == 0 && dio) {
>
> drop "dio" variable and compare here, like
> if (ret == 0 && (gfp_mask & __GFP_REPEAT)
>
Okay, will do. Also will update the patch with other format changes you
suggested.
> > + spin_lock(&journal->j_state_lock);
> > + journal_wait_for_transaction_sync_data(journal);
> > + ret = try_to_free_buffers(page);
> > + spin_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock);
> > + }
>
Also, This patch changed the struct journal_s to add a new wait queue,
so that journal_try_to_free_buffers() could only need to wait for data
to be commited, rather than using j_wait_done_commit queue and wait for
the whole transaction being committed. It might break other fs that
uses journal_s, thus not worth it. Will update the patch.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
