On Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:11:49 +0100 Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Reason: bdi_cap_writeback_dirty() is kinda weirdly intrepreted to mean > > various different things in different places and we really should separate > > its multiple interpretations into separate flags. > > > > Note that this becomes a standalone VFS cleanup patch, and the fuse code > > can then just use it later on. > > Hmm, I can see two slightly different meanings of bdi_cap_writeback_dirty(): > > 1) need to call ->writepage (sync_page_range(), ...) > 2) need to update BDI stats (test_clear_page_writeback(), ...) > > If these two were different flags, then fuse could set the > NEED_WRITEPAGE flag, but clear the NEED_UPDATE_BDI_STATS flag, and do > it manually. > > Does that sound workable? Yup, thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
