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

Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.

From: Alasdair G Kergon <agk redhat com>
To: device-mapper development <dm-devel redhat com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <htejun gmail com>, Stefan Bader <sbader3 googlemail com>, David Chinner <dgc sgi com>, linux-kernel vger kernel org, linux-raid vger kernel org, Jens Axboe <jens axboe oracle com>, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, Andreas Dilger <adilger clusterfs com>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 11:41:15 +0100

On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 11:12:37AM +0200, Stefan Bader wrote:
> it might be better to indicate -EOPNOTSUPP right from
> device-mapper.

Indeed we should.  For support, on receipt of a barrier, dm core should
send a zero-length barrier to all active underlying paths, and delay
mapping any further I/O.

Alasdair
-- 
agk redhat com

References:
- [dm-devel] [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
  - From: Neil Brown
- [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
  - From: Neil Brown
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
  - From: Alasdair G Kergon
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
  - From: Stefan Bader
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
  - From: Alasdair G Kergon
- Re: [dm-devel] Re: [RFD] BIO_RW_BARRIER - what it means for devices, filesystems, and dm/md.
  - From: Stefan Bader

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