From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753352Ab1EIQPz (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2011 12:15:55 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34028 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752277Ab1EIQPy (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 May 2011 12:15:54 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 18:15:47 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Wu Fengguang Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML , Jan Kara , Dave Chinner , Christoph Hellwig , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/17] writeback: elevate queue_io() into wb_writeback() Message-ID: <20110509161547.GT4122@quack.suse.cz> References: <20110506030821.523093711@intel.com> <20110506031612.914153017@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110506031612.914153017@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 06-05-11 11:08:30, Wu Fengguang wrote: > Code refactor for more logical code layout. > No behavior change. > > - remove the mis-named __writeback_inodes_sb() > > - wb_writeback()/writeback_inodes_wb() will decide when to queue_io() > before calling __writeback_inodes_wb() > You can add: Acked-by: Jan Kara Honza > Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang > --- > fs/fs-writeback.c | 27 ++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > --- linux-next.orig/fs/fs-writeback.c 2011-05-05 23:41:36.000000000 +0800 > +++ linux-next/fs/fs-writeback.c 2011-05-05 23:51:59.000000000 +0800 > @@ -580,17 +580,13 @@ static int writeback_sb_inodes(struct su > return 1; > } > > -void writeback_inodes_wb(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > - struct writeback_control *wbc) > +static void __writeback_inodes_wb(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > + struct writeback_control *wbc) > { > int ret = 0; > > if (!wbc->wb_start) > wbc->wb_start = jiffies; /* livelock avoidance */ > - spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); > - > - if (list_empty(&wb->b_io)) > - queue_io(wb, wbc->older_than_this); > > while (!list_empty(&wb->b_io)) { > struct inode *inode = wb_inode(wb->b_io.prev); > @@ -606,19 +602,16 @@ void writeback_inodes_wb(struct bdi_writ > if (ret) > break; > } > - spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > /* Leave any unwritten inodes on b_io */ > } > > -static void __writeback_inodes_sb(struct super_block *sb, > - struct bdi_writeback *wb, struct writeback_control *wbc) > +void writeback_inodes_wb(struct bdi_writeback *wb, > + struct writeback_control *wbc) > { > - WARN_ON(!rwsem_is_locked(&sb->s_umount)); > - > spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); > if (list_empty(&wb->b_io)) > queue_io(wb, wbc->older_than_this); > - writeback_sb_inodes(sb, wb, wbc, true); > + __writeback_inodes_wb(wb, wbc); > spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > } > > @@ -685,7 +678,7 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writ > * The intended call sequence for WB_SYNC_ALL writeback is: > * > * wb_writeback() > - * __writeback_inodes_sb() <== called only once > + * writeback_sb_inodes() <== called only once > * write_cache_pages() <== called once for each inode > * (quickly) tag currently dirty pages > * (maybe slowly) sync all tagged pages > @@ -731,10 +724,14 @@ static long wb_writeback(struct bdi_writ > > retry: > trace_wbc_writeback_start(&wbc, wb->bdi); > + spin_lock(&wb->list_lock); > + if (list_empty(&wb->b_io)) > + queue_io(wb, wbc.older_than_this); > if (work->sb) > - __writeback_inodes_sb(work->sb, wb, &wbc); > + writeback_sb_inodes(work->sb, wb, &wbc, true); > else > - writeback_inodes_wb(wb, &wbc); > + __writeback_inodes_wb(wb, &wbc); > + spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock); > trace_wbc_writeback_written(&wbc, wb->bdi); > > work->nr_pages -= write_chunk - wbc.nr_to_write; > > -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR