On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 04:39:04PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
quoted text
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 04:14:55PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > I still think adding code to every filesystem to optimize for a rather
> > stupid use case is not a good idea.  I dropped out a bit from the
> > thread in the middle, but what was the real use case for lots of
> > concurrent fsyncs on the same inode again?
> 
> The use case I'm looking at is concurrent fsyncs on /different/ inodes,
> actually.  We have _n_ different processes, each writing (and fsyncing) its own
> separate file on the same filesystem.
> 
> iirc, ext4_sync_file is called with the inode mutex held, which prevents
> concurrent fsyncs on the same inode.

Indeed.  Although we could drop it at least for the cache flush
call.  We already do this for block devices.

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/