Andrew Price wrote:
> > Umm... What about the fs_context struct? Why can't that be used to
> > propagate the bdev pointer? That's kind of what it's for...
>
> It would be useful to have the block device pointer in the fs_context since so
> many of the filesystems use them and it makes for an
On Mon, 18 Mar 2019 at 16:15, Mark Syms wrote:
> [Mark Syms] That works better.
Okay, great.
> We were wondering whether it might be a bit too aggressive though in that it
> skips writing the inode entirely unless we have WB_SYNC_ALL whereas the patch
> that Ross Lagerwall posted originally wo
-Original Message-
From: Andreas Gruenbacher
Sent: 17 March 2019 20:06
To: Mark Syms
Cc: cluster-devel@redhat.com; Sergey Dyasli ; Igor
Druzhinin ; Edvin Torok
Subject: Re: [Cluster-devel] [PATCH] gfs2: Prevent writeback in
gfs2_file_write_iter
On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 at 00:59, Mark Syms
On 18/03/2019 13:18, David Howells wrote:
Andrew Price wrote:
sget() is still used instead of sget_fc() as there doesn't seem to be an
obvious replacement for the bdev pointer propagation to the test/set
functions (yet?)
Umm... What about the fs_context struct? Why can't that be used to pr
Andrew Price wrote:
> sget() is still used instead of sget_fc() as there doesn't seem to be an
> obvious replacement for the bdev pointer propagation to the test/set
> functions (yet?)
Umm... What about the fs_context struct? Why can't that be used to propagate
the bdev pointer? That's kind o
Thanks for sorting this out so quickly,
Steve.
On 17/03/2019 17:40, Andrew Price wrote:
These patches convert gfs2 and gfs2meta to use fs_context.
In both cases we still use sget() instead of sget_fc() as there doesn't seem to
be a clear idiomatic way to propagate the bdev currently.
Tested
