Re: Dirtiable inode bdi default != sb bdi btrfs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 01:38:07AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > No.  For one thing we don't need any exception for correctnes alone -
> > even the block device variant would work fine with the default case.
> Here I don't agree. If you don't have some kind of exception, sb->s_bdi
> for both "block" and "mtd_inodefs" filesystems points to
> noop_backing_dev_info and you get no writeback for that one. So it isn't
> just a performance issue but also a correctness one.

Indeed - for internal filesystems that require writeback the change
causes trouble if they haven't registered a s_bdi.  But for all user
visible filesystems that doesn't happen as we require s_bdi for
sync or even unmounts to work.
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux