Hello,
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 06:45:25PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Since "bdi: reimplement bdev_inode_switch_bdi()" the block device code
018a17bdc865 ("bdi: reimplement bdev_inode_switch_bdi()") would be
better.
> writes out all dirty data whenever switching the backing_dev_info for
> a block device inode. But a block device inode can only be dirtied
> when it is in use, which means we only have to write it out on the
> final blkdev_put, but not when doing a blkdev_get.
> @@ -1464,9 +1469,11 @@ static void __blkdev_put(struct block_device *bdev, fmode_t mode, int for_part)
> WARN_ON_ONCE(bdev->bd_holders);
> sync_blockdev(bdev);
> kill_bdev(bdev);
> - /* ->release can cause the old bdi to disappear,
> - * so must switch it out first
> + /*
> + * ->release can cause the queue to disappaear, so flush all
^^^^^
typo
> + * dirty data before.
> */
> + bdev_write_inode(bdev->bd_inode);
Is this an optimization or something necessary for the following
changes? If latter, maybe it's a good idea to state why this is
necessary in the description? Otherwise,
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>