On Wed 21-11-12 09:09:41, Jeff Moyer wrote: > Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> writes: > > >> Just to be clear, are you saying you would like me to remove the > >> mutex_lock/unlock pair from ext4_sync_file? (I had already factored out > >> the common code between this new code path and the fsync path in my tree.) > > Yes, after some thinking I came to that conclusion. We actually need to > > keep i_mutex around ext4_flush_unwritten_io() to avoid livelocks but the > > rest doesn't need it. The change should be definitely a separate patch just > > in case there's something subtle I missed and we need to bisect in > > future... I've attached a patch for that so that blame for bugs goes my way > > ;) Compile tested only so far. I'll give it some more testing overnight. > > Great, thanks Jan! I'll include this in the next posting. OK, patch passed xfstests and a test banging one file with random IO and fsyncs from 8 processes (in data=ordered, data=journal, and nojournal modes). So it seems I didn't miss anything substantial. So ship it! ;) 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
