On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:22:43PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> commit 6ad9d25595aea8efa0d45c0a2dd28b4a415e34e6
> Author: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri Aug 15 23:19:15 2008 +0530
>
> move the dirty inodes to the end of the list
>
> diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> index 1afcb11..650b021 100644
> --- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
> @@ -4258,7 +4258,8 @@ ext4_mb_discard_lg_preallocations(struct super_block *sb,
>
> static void ext4_mb_add_n_trim(struct ext4_allocation_context *ac)
> {
> - int order, added = 0, lg_prealloc_count = 1;
> + int order, lg_prealloc_count = 1;
> + bool added = 0;
> struct super_block *sb = ac->ac_sb;
> struct ext4_locality_group *lg = ac->ac_lg;
> struct ext4_prealloc_space *tmp_pa, *pa = ac->ac_pa;
> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> index 25adfc3..95eee62 100644
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode, int flags)
> */
> if (!was_dirty) {
> inode->dirtied_when = jiffies;
> - list_move(&inode->i_list, &sb->s_dirty);
> + list_move_tail(&inode->i_list, &sb->s_dirty);
> }
> }
> out:
> @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ static void redirty_tail(struct inode *inode)
> */
> static void requeue_io(struct inode *inode)
> {
> - list_move(&inode->i_list, &inode->i_sb->s_more_io);
> + list_move_tail(&inode->i_list, &inode->i_sb->s_more_io);
> }
>
> static void inode_sync_complete(struct inode *inode)
The patch is not really useful and is also wrong. Verifying the results
again I found that patch didn't make any difference. We actually read
from the s_io list from the tail not from the head (generic_sync_sb_inodes)
That means inodes are already added in the order they are dirtied.
-aneesh
--
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
