On Tue, Jul 07 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 08:38:46AM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > > SYSCALL_DEFINE0(sync)
> > > {
> > > - wakeup_pdflush(0);
> > > + wakeup_flusher_threads(0);
> > > sync_filesystems(0);
> > > sync_filesystems(1);
> > > if (unlikely(laptop_mode))
> >
> > That is correct! I have just now updated for-next as well, so your next
> > pull should lose this fixup.
>
> It's not correct at all. We'll how have various flusher threads doing
> async syncs, just to wait for them again synchronously. The right thing
> to do here is to queue up the data integrity sync to per-bdi threads and
> execute those in parallel.
Sorry, I didn't judge the validity of the original patch, merely that
the wakeup_pdflush() -> wakeup_flusher_threads() is the correct patch in
the context of the per-bdi flushing.
--
Jens Axboe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
