On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:57:59AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:31:27AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Vivek, does CFQ still need any hints for this sort of handoff? > > > > Christoph, I don't understand the issue enough to comment on it. > > Had a quick look at the patch. Looks like some action (writing log), has > been moved to a worker thread. And in some cases (log force triggered > flush, whatever it is), we seem to prefer to do it from the submitter's > context. Yes. This is to workaround the old problem of cfq getting utterly confused if cooperating I/O beeing submitted from different threads. The case in the previous version of this patch was: - thread doing the fsync will write out data, and wait for it - then we'd force the log by kicking a workqueue and waiting for it quite similar to the ext3/4 fsync issues that we had long discussions about. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
