On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:05:07AM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > fs: mark_inode_dirty barrier fix > > Filesystems appear to be using ->dirty_inode, expecting that the dirtying > operating is done and visible to all CPUs (eg. setting private inode dirty > bits, without any barriers themselves). So release the dirty "critical > section" with a barrier before calling ->dirty_inode. > > Cost is not significantly changed, because we're just moving the barrier. > Those filesystems that do use ->dirty_inode should have to care slightly > less about barriers, which is a good thing. > > Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx> Looks good to me. I can't see any reason to have a barrier after ->dirty_inode. -- 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
