diff mbox

[24/51] ext3: wait on all pending commits in ext3_sync_fs

Message ID 20081106214431.GL18939@mit.edu
State Accepted, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Theodore Ts'o Nov. 6, 2008, 9:44 p.m. UTC
My version of this patch also cleaned up the following comment, which
has been wrong since 2.5.70 or thereabouts...

This isn't urgent, so could you just queue this up for the next merge
window in the -mm tree?

						- Ted

ext3: Clean up outdated and incorrect comment for ext3_write_super()

Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
---
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Andrew Morton Nov. 6, 2008, 10:20 p.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 16:44:31 -0500
Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

> My version of this patch also cleaned up the following comment, which
> has been wrong since 2.5.70 or thereabouts...

oh, I didn't spot that.

I looked at the version in linux-next and saw that it was propagating
the error value back to the VFS as well.  Or maybe that was done in a
separate patch, dunno.  But while that's a good change, I felt that we
should separate it from this bugfix.  I meant to mention it but I
forgot, sorry.
 
> This isn't urgent, so could you just queue this up for the next merge
> window in the -mm tree?
> 
> 						- Ted
> 
> ext3: Clean up outdated and incorrect comment for ext3_write_super()
> 
> Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
> ---
> diff --git a/fs/ext3/super.c b/fs/ext3/super.c
> index e5717a4..296c044 100644
> --- a/fs/ext3/super.c
> +++ b/fs/ext3/super.c
> @@ -2375,12 +2375,9 @@ int ext3_force_commit(struct super_block *sb)
>  /*
>   * Ext3 always journals updates to the superblock itself, so we don't
>   * have to propagate any other updates to the superblock on disk at this
> - * point.  Just start an async writeback to get the buffers on their way
> - * to the disk.
> - *
> - * This implicitly triggers the writebehind on sync().
> + * point.  (We can probably nuke this function altogether, and remove
> + * any mention to sb->s_dirt in all of fs/ext3; eventual cleanup...)
>   */
> -
>  static void ext3_write_super (struct super_block * sb)
>  {
>  	if (mutex_trylock(&sb->s_lock) != 0)

Sure.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Theodore Ts'o Nov. 6, 2008, 10:42 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 02:20:20PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 16:44:31 -0500
> Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > My version of this patch also cleaned up the following comment, which
> > has been wrong since 2.5.70 or thereabouts...
> 
> oh, I didn't spot that.
> 
> I looked at the version in linux-next and saw that it was propagating
> the error value back to the VFS as well.  Or maybe that was done in a
> separate patch, dunno.  But while that's a good change, I felt that we
> should separate it from this bugfix.  I meant to mention it but I
> forgot, sorry.

Fair enough.  Propagating the return value to the VFS is also a
cleanup, although given that the VFS drops return value on the floor,
I considered it a risk-free change and included it in the ext4 version
of the patch.  But yeah, I can see why separating could be argued to
be the right thing.

So that means we'll need two cleanup patches for ext3; one to fix the
comment, and another to propagate the error code back to the VFS.

	     	     		      	    	 - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Arthur Jones Nov. 7, 2008, 2:58 p.m. UTC | #3
Hi Ted, ...

On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 02:42:02PM -0800, Theodore Tso wrote:
> [...]
> So that means we'll need two cleanup patches for ext3; one to fix the
> comment, and another to propagate the error code back to the VFS.

A trivial patch for this is in the linux-ext4
mailing list:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122574905024321&w=2

Arthur

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/fs/ext3/super.c b/fs/ext3/super.c
index e5717a4..296c044 100644
--- a/fs/ext3/super.c
+++ b/fs/ext3/super.c
@@ -2375,12 +2375,9 @@  int ext3_force_commit(struct super_block *sb)
 /*
  * Ext3 always journals updates to the superblock itself, so we don't
  * have to propagate any other updates to the superblock on disk at this
- * point.  Just start an async writeback to get the buffers on their way
- * to the disk.
- *
- * This implicitly triggers the writebehind on sync().
+ * point.  (We can probably nuke this function altogether, and remove
+ * any mention to sb->s_dirt in all of fs/ext3; eventual cleanup...)
  */
-
 static void ext3_write_super (struct super_block * sb)
 {
 	if (mutex_trylock(&sb->s_lock) != 0)