On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 02:07:24PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > Hmm, BTW, shouldn't the call to xfs_flush_pages() in > xfs_file_buffered_aio_write() be converted to an asynchronous one? I don't > quite see a point in waiting for io completion... Generally, flushing of > the inode there seems of limited usefulness to me since that inode could be > just a tiny victim not holding much delayallocated blocks. This comes from commit xfs: make inode flush at ENOSPC synchronous from Dave - before that it was asynchronous and in weird context, so it seems we defintively need it to be synchronous. I agree that just flushing this inode seems like a rather odd handling for ENOSPC. It's even more odd as we already use the big hammer before in when we git ENOSPC in ->write_begin. The only thing I can imagine is that this is the last attempt to get anything freed. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
