Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
From: Phillip Susi <hidden>
Date: 2007-05-31 18:31:05
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>
David Chinner wrote:
That sounds like a good idea - we can leave the existing WRITE_BARRIER behaviour unchanged and introduce a new WRITE_ORDERED behaviour that only guarantees ordering. The filesystem can then choose which to use where appropriate....
So what if you want a synchronous write, but DON'T care about the order? They need to be two completely different flags which you can choose to combine, or use individually.