On 2010-06-09 14:25, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 09:51:39PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 08/06/10 18.14, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> When we call writeback_inodes_wb from writeback_inodes_sb we always have >>> s_umount held, which currently makes the whole operation a no-op. >>> >>> But if we are called to write out inodes for a specific superblock we always >>> have s_umount held, so replace the incorrect logic checking for WB_SYNC_ALL >>> which only worked by coincidence with the proper check for an explicit >>> superblock argument. >> >> This is tons better than the pinning, I like it a lot. > > Unfortunately I accidentally removed the requeue_io call when we fail > to pin the inode. This leads to softlockups after heavy I/O load. > > Please fold the patch below into this one, or if not possible add it > to the end of the series. Oops, not good. I already merged and pushed them out, so I added it to the end instead. -- 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
