xfs: wait for direct I/O to complete in fsync and write_inode
PATCH 1/1 xfs: wait for direct I/O to complete in fsync and write_inode
We need to wait for all pending direct I/O requests before taking care of metadata in fsync and write_inode.
Note that the write_inode hunk will causes conflicts when merging with mainline, I'm not sure how to best deal with that.
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_file.c +2 -0
@@ -115,6 +115,8 @@ xfs_file_fsync(xfs_iflags_clear (ip,XFS_ITRUNCATED ); +xfs_ioend_wait (ip); +/* * We always need to make sure that the required inode state is safe on * disk. The inode might be clean but we still might need to force the
fs/xfs/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c +2 -0
@@ -1079,6 +1079,8 @@ xfs_fs_write_inode(if (error) goto out; +xfs_ioend_wait (ip); +/* * Make sure the inode has hit stable storage. By using the * log and the fsync transactions we reduce the IOs we have
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Quoted 3 lines · Christoph Hellwig
We need to wait for all pending direct I/O requests before taking care of metadata in fsync and
write_inode.
ping?
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Quoted 3 lines · Christoph Hellwig
We need to wait for all pending direct I/O requests before taking care of metadata in fsync and
write_inode.
Sorry, I missed this one when scaning the list for outstanding patches yesterday. The concept looks fine, though:
Quoted 2 lines
Note that the
write_inodehunk will causes conflicts when merging with mainline, I'm not sure how to best deal with that.
I don't think it applies to the current xfs-dev tree any more, either. Can you rebase it?
Cheers,
Dave.
Signature · 7 lines
Dave Chinner [email protected] _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list [email protected] http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs