From 2d544564f9954860235db97df2e549a66c61f557 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Qi Yong <qiyong@fc-cn.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 22:29:23 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] skip writing data pages when inode is under I_SYNC
Since I_SYNC was split out from I_LOCK, the concern in commit
4b89eed93e0fa40a63e3d7b1796ec1337ea7a3aa ("Write back inode data pages
even when the inode itself is locked") is not longer valid.
We should revert to the original behavior: in __writeback_single_inode(),
when we find an I_SYNC-ed inode and we're not doing a data-integrity sync,
skip writing entirely. Otherwise, we are double calling do_writepages()
Signed-off-by: Qi Yong <qiyong@fc-cn.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: Joern Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>
Cc: WU Fengguang <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
Cc: Michael Rubin <mrubin@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
---
fs/fs-writeback.c | 13 +------------
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
index 300324bd563c..3fe782d70a71 100644
--- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
+++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
@@ -334,9 +334,6 @@ __writeback_single_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
WARN_ON(inode->i_state & I_WILL_FREE);
if ((wbc->sync_mode != WB_SYNC_ALL) && (inode->i_state & I_SYNC)) {
- struct address_space *mapping = inode->i_mapping;
- int ret;
-
/*
* We're skipping this inode because it's locked, and we're not
* doing writeback-for-data-integrity. Move it to s_more_io so
@@ -345,15 +342,7 @@ __writeback_single_inode(struct inode *inode, struct writeback_control *wbc)
* completed a full scan of s_io.
*/
requeue_io(inode);
-
- /*
- * Even if we don't actually write the inode itself here,
- * we can at least start some of the data writeout..
- */
- spin_unlock(&inode_lock);
- ret = do_writepages(mapping, wbc);
- spin_lock(&inode_lock);
- return ret;
+ return 0;
}
/*