On Tue 05-10-10 09:54:49, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 10/05/2010 09:53 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > > On 10/05/2010 04:32 AM, Jan Kara wrote: > >> Hi Boaz, > >> > >> On Mon 04-10-10 18:02:13, Boaz Harrosh wrote: > >>> Sorry I've just seen Jan's patch: > >>> From: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> > >>> Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 23:56:48 +0200 > >>> Subject: [PATCH] bdi: Initialize inode->i_mapping.backing_dev_info to sb->s_bdi > >> ... > >>> That works for me as well. Was it decided how to solve this? Other wise > >>> I'll need to patch exofs, ASAP for this -rc > >> In the end, we'll use Christoph's patch > >> (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/9/29/76) changing inode_to_bdi() to be > >> more conservative and also the warning will be gone. So you don't have to > >> patch anything... > >> > >> Honza > > > > I would still like to fix it. Currently each inode->mapping.backing_dev_info in my > > none-block-filesystem is set to &default_backing_dev_info. This sounds scary! > > what about the future patches that will schedule a wakup on set_inode_dirty ? > > Will they not need my proper sb->s_bdi on each ->mapping? > > > > I could do it in the filesystem, but the way the code is now I'll need to > > set it in 5 different places, or clean up the code with more common code. > > > > That said, I think your (or my) patch makes much more sense. The sb->s_bdi > > is a much better common default then &default_backing_dev_info. By now > > is &default_backing_dev_info really needed at all? > > > > I guess I'll have to go head and do it in FS code. > > > > BTW: I liked that WARN_ON it exposed a real problem. In fact, it exposed too many of them for being so late in the -rc cycle ;). Luckily they were all harmless (at least currently). So for now we are better off without the warning so that we don't scare users. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- 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
