[PATCH 24/30] jbd: replace barriers with explicit flush / FUA usage
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Date: 2010-08-25 15:47:41
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, linux-raid, linux-scsi, lkml
Subsystem:
filesystems (vfs and infrastructure), the rest · Maintainers:
Alexander Viro, Christian Brauner, Linus Torvalds
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> Switch to the WRITE_FLUSH_FUA flag for journal commits and remove the EOPNOTSUPP detection for barriers. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> Acked-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> --- fs/jbd/commit.c | 30 +++--------------------------- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/jbd/commit.c b/fs/jbd/commit.c
index 95d8c11..484c5e5 100644
--- a/fs/jbd/commit.c
+++ b/fs/jbd/commit.c@@ -137,34 +137,10 @@ static int journal_write_commit_record(journal_t *journal, JBUFFER_TRACE(descriptor, "write commit block"); set_buffer_dirty(bh); - if (journal->j_flags & JFS_BARRIER) { - ret = __sync_dirty_buffer(bh, WRITE_SYNC | WRITE_BARRIER); - - /* - * Is it possible for another commit to fail at roughly - * the same time as this one? If so, we don't want to - * trust the barrier flag in the super, but instead want - * to remember if we sent a barrier request - */ - if (ret == -EOPNOTSUPP) { - char b[BDEVNAME_SIZE]; - - printk(KERN_WARNING - "JBD: barrier-based sync failed on %s - " - "disabling barriers\n", - bdevname(journal->j_dev, b)); - spin_lock(&journal->j_state_lock); - journal->j_flags &= ~JFS_BARRIER; - spin_unlock(&journal->j_state_lock); - - /* And try again, without the barrier */ - set_buffer_uptodate(bh); - set_buffer_dirty(bh); - ret = sync_dirty_buffer(bh); - } - } else { + if (journal->j_flags & JFS_BARRIER) + ret = __sync_dirty_buffer(bh, WRITE_SYNC | WRITE_FLUSH_FUA); + else ret = sync_dirty_buffer(bh); - } put_bh(bh); /* One for getblk() */ journal_put_journal_head(descriptor);
--
1.7.1