[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] [PATCHSET block#for-2.6.36-post] block: replace barrier with sequenced flush
- From: Tejun Heo <tj kernel org>
- To: Christoph Hellwig <hch lst de>
- Cc: tytso mit edu, linux-scsi vger kernel org, jaxboe fusionio com, jack suse cz, linux-kernel vger kernel org, linux-raid vger kernel org, linux-ide vger kernel org, dm-devel redhat com, James Bottomley suse de, konishi ryusuke lab ntt co jp, linux-fsdevel vger kernel org, vst vlnb net, rwheeler redhat com, swhiteho redhat com, chris mason oracle com
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCHSET block#for-2.6.36-post] block: replace barrier with sequenced flush
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:36:37 +0200
Hello,
On 08/20/2010 03:22 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Many storage devices, especially in the consumer market, come with volatile
> write back caches. That means the devices signal I/O completion to the
> operating system before data actually has hit the physical medium.
A bit nit picky but flash devices can also have writeback caches and
the term physical medium sounds a bit off for those cases. Maybe just
saying "non-volatile media" is better?
> Implementation details for filesystems
> --------------------------------------
>
> Filesystem can simply set the REQ_FLUSH and REQ_FUA bits and do not have to
> worry if the underlying devices need any explicit cache flushing and how
> the Forced Unit Access is implemented. The REQ_FLUSH and REQ_FUA flags
> may both be set on a single bio.
It may be worthwhile to explain the sequence of operations when
REQ_FLUSH + data + REQ_FUA is executed. It can be extrapolated from
the previous two descriptions but I think giving examples of different
sequences depending on FLUSH/FUA configuration would be helpful to
help understanding the overall picture of things.
Other than those, looks good to me.
Thanks.
--
tejun
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]