Please review the below patch. I will try to push it through the
exofs tree for 2.6.31
---
Subject: [PATCH] exofs: Avoid using file_fsync()
The use of file_fsync() in exofs_file_sync() is not necessary since it
does some extra stuff not used by exofs. Open code just the parts that
are currently needed.
TODO: Farther optimization can be done to sync the sb only on inode
update of new files, Usually the sb update is not needed in exofs.
Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/exofs/file.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/exofs/file.c b/fs/exofs/file.c
index 6ed7fe4..9e60d68 100644
--- a/fs/exofs/file.c
+++ b/fs/exofs/file.c
@@ -47,16 +47,24 @@ static int exofs_file_fsync(struct file *filp, struct dentry *dentry,
{
int ret;
struct address_space *mapping = filp->f_mapping;
+ struct inode * inode = dentry->d_inode;
+ struct super_block * sb;
ret = filemap_write_and_wait(mapping);
if (ret)
return ret;
- /*Note: file_fsync below also calles sync_blockdev, which is a no-op
- * for exofs, but other then that it does sync_inode and
- * sync_superblock which is what we need here.
- */
- return file_fsync(filp, dentry, datasync);
+ /* sync the inode attributes */
+ ret = write_inode_now(inode, 0);
+
+ /* This is a good place to write the sb */
+ /* TODO: Sechedule an sb-sync on create */
+ sb = inode->i_sb;
+ lock_super(sb);
+ if (sb->s_dirt && sb->s_op->write_super)
+ sb->s_op->write_super(sb);
+ unlock_super(sb);
+ return ret;
}
static int exofs_flush(struct file *file, fl_owner_t id)
--
1.6.2.1
--
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
