Re: [PATCH v1 0/9] do not use s_dirt in ext4

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Thu, 2012-03-22 at 14:42 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > But AFAIKC, the whole '__ext4_handle_dirty_super()' also falls-back to
> > marking the superblock as dirty if the file-system has no journal for
> > some reasons, right?
>   Yes. And I wrote that if you do sync_buffer(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_sbh) instead
> of marking superblock dirty, it would be fine.

OK, sorry for not reading carefully, I will take a look at this and all
the places where we use 's_dirt' and try to think how to just eliminate
them. But since I have 0 experience with ext4, I'll probably need some
help, but let's see.

Thanks for reviewing and the feed-back!

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]


  Powered by Linux