Re: [PATCH] ide barrier support, #2

[Jens Axboe]

On Tue, Oct 14 2003, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Uh be careful! It must be WRITEBARRIER, not WRITESYNC. I think I'll kill
> > WRITEBARRIER and just call it WRITESYNC, it's more logical. I've added
> > the modified variant, thanks.
> 
> Why? The journaling just checks if the write finished and then submits
> the dependent writes. It doesn't care about reordering.

See the patch, WRITESYNC is used solely internally in raid1.
WRITEBARRIER is a bitmask of BIO_RW and BIO_RW_BARRIER and that is what
you want. I'll make that more clear. Writes will not be reordered around
the barrier either, btw.

> As long as WRITESYNC guarantees that the data hit disk when completed
> then it should be ok.

Yep.

-- 
Jens Axboe

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