Re: Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
From: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@redhat.com>
Date: 2007-05-30 10:41:15
Also in:
dm-devel, linux-fsdevel, lkml
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2007-06-01 · Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md. · Bill Davidsen <hidden>
- 2007-06-01 · Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md. · David Chinner <hidden>
- 2007-06-01 · Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md. · Jens Axboe <hidden>
- 2007-06-01 · Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md. · Neil Brown <hidden>
- 2007-05-31 · Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md. · Bill Davidsen <hidden>
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:12:37AM +0200, Stefan Bader wrote:
it might be better to indicate -EOPNOTSUPP right from device-mapper.
Indeed we should. For support, on receipt of a barrier, dm core should send a zero-length barrier to all active underlying paths, and delay mapping any further I/O. Alasdair -- agk@redhat.com