On Wed, Sep 16 2009, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 15-09-09 20:16:55, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > bdi_start_writeback() is currently split into two paths, one for
> > WB_SYNC_NONE and one for WB_SYNC_ALL. Add bdi_sync_writeback()
> > for WB_SYNC_ALL writeback and let bdi_start_writeback() handle
> > only WB_SYNC_NONE.
> >
> > Push down the writeback_control allocation and only accept the
> > parameters that make sense for each function. This cleans up
> > the API considerably.
> Nice cleanup!
>
> > @@ -771,6 +798,8 @@ static long wb_check_old_data_flush(struct bdi_writeback *wb)
> > struct wb_writeback_args args = {
> > .nr_pages = nr_pages,
> > .sync_mode = WB_SYNC_NONE,
> > + .for_kupdate = 1,
> > + .range_cyclic = 1,
> > };
> >
> > return wb_writeback(wb, &args);
> This chunk should be in patch number 4.
Yeah, I wonder why that snuck into this one...
--
Jens Axboe
--
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
