ping? On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:34:34AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > We do need a barrier for the first buffer of a split log write. Otherwise > we might incorrectly stamp the tail LSN into transactions in the first > block, or not flush data I/O before updating the inode size. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > Index: xfs-dev/fs/xfs/xfs_log.c > =================================================================== > --- xfs-dev.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_log.c 2010-06-28 11:51:30.423004228 +0200 > +++ xfs-dev/fs/xfs/xfs_log.c 2010-06-28 11:52:52.559255519 +0200 > @@ -1423,11 +1423,8 @@ xlog_sync(xlog_t *log, > XFS_BUF_BUSY(bp); > XFS_BUF_ASYNC(bp); > bp->b_flags |= XBF_LOG_BUFFER; > - /* > - * Do an ordered write for the log block. > - * Its unnecessary to flush the first split block in the log wrap case. > - */ > - if (!split && (log->l_mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_BARRIER)) > + > + if (log->l_mp->m_flags & XFS_MOUNT_BARRIER) > XFS_BUF_ORDERED(bp); > > ASSERT(XFS_BUF_ADDR(bp) <= log->l_logBBsize-1); > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ---end quoted text--- _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
