On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 02:26:47PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > I think starting by renaming the xfs-syncd workqueue to the > xfs_mount_wq because there's nothing "sync" related about it's > functionality any more. Is there any good reason to keep queueing different work items on the same queue now that workqueues are incredibly cheap? > I'll then kill xfs_syncd_init/stop functions and open code the > intialisation of the work structures and start them in the > appropriate places for their functionality. e.g. reclaim work is > demand started and stops when there's nothing more to do or at > unmount, the flush work is demand started and we need to complete > them all at unmount, and the xfssync work is really now "periodic > log work" so should be started once we complete log recovery > successfullly and stopped before we tear down the log.... Sounds good. You probably also want to kill off xfs_sync_fsdata as it doesn't make any sense with our current sync / ail pushing code before that. > Then I can move the xfs_sync_worker to xfs_log.c and rename it. Before that you probably want to kill the xfs_ail_push_all in it in favour or xfsaild waking up periodically by itself if there is anything in the AIL. > If I then convert xfs_flush_worker to use the generic writeback code > (writeback_inodes_sb_if_idle) the xfs_sync_data() can go away. Good plan. It'll still need the trylock changes for it that don't really seem to make forward progress on fsdevel. > That > means the only user of xfs_inode_ag_iterator is the quotaoff code > (xfs_qm_dqrele_all_inodes), so it could be moved elsewhere (like > xfs_inode.c). fair enough. > Then xfs_quiesce_data() can be moved to xfs-super.c where it can sit > alongside the two functions that call it, and the same can be done > for xfs_quiesce_attr(). xfs_fs_remount shouldn't really need to call it, as do_remount_sb calls it just before entering ->remount_fs. Although looking at it closter do_remount_sb probably needs to move the sync_filesystem call until after the check for r/o files and preventing new writes. Independent of that I think xfs_quiesce_data should be merged into xfs_fs_sync_fs - until do_remount_sb is fixed xfs_fs_remount should simply call xfs_fs_sync_fs. This also is a good opportunity to redo the maze of comments describing the freeze process, which is rather outdated and a bit confusing now. > That will leave only inode cache reclaim functions in xfs_sync.c. > These are closely aligned to the inode allocation, freeing and cache > lookup functions in xfs_iget.c, so I'm thinking of merging the two > into a single file named xfs_inode_cache.c so both xfs_sync.c and > xfs_iget.c go away. Sounds good, although I'd call the file xfs_icache.c - that seems to fit better with the general theme of naming schemes in XFS. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
