On Sun, 2009-03-29 at 22:22 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Theodore Tso wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:43:22PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> As long as we keep the call there this is probably good, but after > >> talking w/ Chris Mason, I think the call is extraneous anyway and should > >> probably just be removed... > >> > > > > Yes, I agree, but it takes a lot of digging to be completely sure of > > that it's safe to remove it. Interestingly, it was you who added the > > patch which added the call to blkdev_issue_flush(): > > > commit d755fb384250d6bd7fd18a0930e71965acc8e72e > > Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Jul 11 19:27:31 2008 -0400 > > > Yes, it was. Although I got the idea when hch pointed out that SuSE did > this... thanks to Chris. It's come full circle. :) Grin. I'm not sure the I_DIRTY checks alone are enough to decide that a commit is required though. I think the inode could be clean but still have metadata that needs commit. -chris -- 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
