Subject: Re: mp->mnt_vnodelist change
To: Reinoud Zandijk <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Reilly <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/19/2006 15:41:11
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:01:53 +0200
Reinoud Zandijk <email@example.com> wrote:
> The syncfs syncer uses a different set of lists but yes, it too has the
> same problem with the lists.
I've never looked at the code, but I would have thought that
there would be some sort of block-sorting/elevator-algorithm step
in between "this list of blocks need to go to disk" and "disk
drive: seek to xyz; write blocks nnn to nnn+m". Isn't there?
If there is, then this reversal probably doesn't matter much, if
all it does is pessimize an in-memory sort.