On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 16:41:47 +0800
Fengguang Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This patch fixes this bug. Though I'm not sure why __block_write_full_page()
> is called only to do nothing and who actually issued the writeback for us.
kjourald wrote the page's buffers back (ext3 in ordered-data mode)
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 09:43:33AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 07:55:18AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> > >
> > > do not quite agree with each other. The page writeback should be skipped
> > > for
> > > 'locked buffer', but here it is 'clean buffer'!
> >
> > Ok, so that
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 07:55:18AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> >
> > do not quite agree with each other. The page writeback should be skipped for
> > 'locked buffer', but here it is 'clean buffer'!
>
> Ok, so that means we need an equivalent fix in xfs_start_page_writeback()
> as it will skip p
>
> do not quite agree with each other. The page writeback should be skipped for
> 'locked buffer', but here it is 'clean buffer'!
Ok, so that means we need an equivalent fix in xfs_start_page_writeback()
as it will skip pages with clean buffers just like this. Something like
this (untested)?
--
Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and me identified a writeback bug:
> The following strange behavior can be observed:
>
> 1. large file is written
> 2. after 30 seconds, nr_dirty goes down by 1024
> 3. then for some time (< 30 sec) nothing happens (disk idle)
> 4. then nr_dirty again goes down b
5 matches
Mail list logo
