On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 04:25:41AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
quoted text
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 07:31:32PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > And actually I think it is much better to have sync_inode, which means
> > we'll be able to get rid of commit_metadata (which should be an inode
> > operation anyway, not an export operation which really should deal with
> > exporting filesystems to a non-vfs namespace, not nfsd hacks).
> > 
> > commit_metadata would just be sync_inode with a null range or no data
> > sync flag set.
> 
> As explained in the previous mail it's not just not writing data, it's
> conceptually quite different from fsync.

OK I missed that part about not requiring dirty metadata to be written,
just currently ongoing async operations. But then I don't understand how
it would be used by nfsd, how does nfsd start some async operation on
the inode metadata such that ->commit_metadata would do anything useful
for it?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html