On 04/20/2012 11:20 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
Dave Kleikamp<dave.kleikamp@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 04/20/2012 09:48 AM, Maxim V. Patlasov wrote:
On 03/30/2012 07:43 PM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
From: Zach Brown<zab@xxxxxxxxx>
This uses the new kernel aio interface to process loopback IO by
submitting concurrent direct aio. Previously loop's IO was serialized
by synchronous processing in a thread.
The patch ignores REQ_FLUSH bit of bi_rw. Is it simply overlook?
Good question. Since the loop device is sending only direct IO requests,
it shouldn't be necessary to explicitly flush page cache, but REQ_FLUSH
REQ_FLUSH isn't about the page cache, it's about flushing the volatile
disk write cache. You need to handle that.
I guess O_DIRECT doesn't routinely issue flushes simply because it's too
expensive? Apps that care about consistent IO and O_DIRECT are expected
to not have writeback caching enabled? 'cause there's no way they're
issuing syncs themselves.
So yeah, I'd agree that the loop code should be reworked a bit so that
both the filebacked and aio methods call vfs_sync() when they see
REQ_FLUSH.
Bleh.
- z
(Sorry, no real time to dig into this now. Lots more time in two months!)
--
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
