At 11:54 08/10/16, Andrew Morton wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:44:39 +0900 Hisashi Hifumi
><hifumi.hisashi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> Unfortunately, I did not succeed to get good performance number that
>> prove this patch had some benefit.
>
>OK, thanks, I dropped it.
>
>> >This patch remains in a stalled state...
>> >
>> >And then there's this:
>> >
>>
>> >:
>> >: Really, I think what this patch tells us is that 3f31fddf ("jbd: fix
>> >: race between free buffer and commit transaction") was an unpleasant
>> >: hack which had undesirable and unexpected side-effects. I think - that
>> >: depends upon your as-yet-undisclosed testing results?
>> >:
>> >: Perhaps we should revert 3f31fddf and have another think about how to
>> >: fix the direct-io -EIO problem. One option would be to hold our noses
>> >: and add a new gfp_t flag for this specific purpose?
>> >:
>>
>> direct-io -EIO problem was already fixed by following patch.
>>
>> commit 6ccfa806a9cfbbf1cd43d5b6aa47ef2c0eb518fd
>> Author: Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tue Sep 2 14:35:40 2008 -0700
>>
>> VFS: fix dio write returning EIO when try_to_release_page fails
>>
>> Dio falls back to buffered write when dio write gets EIO due to failure
>of try_to_release_page
>> by above patch. So I think just reverting the patch 3f31fddf ("jbd: fix
>race between
>> free buffer and commit transaction") is good approach.
>
>Fair enough. Could I ask that you (or someone) send a suitable patch
>sometime?
Yes, sometimes I send you some bug fixing or performance improvement
patch.
>
>I could generate the patch, but I'd never get around to testing it.
>Too busy fixing rejects and compile errors :(
--
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
