On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 07:54:55PM -0600, Alex Elder wrote: > On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 15:48 +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The current xfs_file_aio_write code is a mess of locking shenanigans > > to handle the different locking requirements of buffered and direct > > IO. Start to clean this up by disentangling the direct IO path from > > the mess. > > All good, very good. But I'm not sure why you cut > out the code that backed off to buffered I/O if > generic_file_direct_write() returns an error. > (You gave no explanation.) Oh, I thought I put one in there. It's simple, though - XFS handles all allocation cases in the direct IO code and never returns a result that will require falling back to the buffered IO path. It is basically a code path that has been unused for years and all it does is make the logic much more complex to understand. I'll add that to the commit message.... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
