On Wed 27-07-11 05:44:23, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > -static int __sync_filesystem(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
> > +static void __sync_filesystem(struct super_block *sb, int wait)
> > {
> > - /*
> > - * This should be safe, as we require bdi backing to actually
> > - * write out data in the first place
> > - */
> > - if (sb->s_bdi == &noop_backing_dev_info)
> > - return 0;
> > -
>
> Moving this check is not related to the block device writeback, is it?
> Furthermore it gets moved deeper into the stack later on anyway, so it
> gets reverted.
Good point, I'll swap patches 1 & 2.
> I think the series would be much cleaner if this patch gets moved
> towards the end of it.
>
> > +static void sync_all_bdevs(int wait)
> > +{
>
> This function should at least have a comment explaining why we need it.
Will do.
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
