From ebbbf757c6b8577ac2fb6181c08c2059153bb0e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jan Kara Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:13:58 +0200 Subject: ntfs: Use new syncing helpers and update comments Use new syncing helpers in .write and .aio_write functions. Also remove superfluous syncing in ntfs_file_buffered_write() and update comments about generic_osync_inode(). CC: Anton Altaparmakov CC: linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net Signed-off-by: Jan Kara --- fs/ntfs/mft.c | 13 ++++++------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) (limited to 'fs/ntfs/mft.c') diff --git a/fs/ntfs/mft.c b/fs/ntfs/mft.c index 23bf68453d7d..1caa0ef0b2bb 100644 --- a/fs/ntfs/mft.c +++ b/fs/ntfs/mft.c @@ -384,13 +384,12 @@ unm_err_out: * it is dirty in the inode meta data rather than the data page cache of the * inode, and thus there are no data pages that need writing out. Therefore, a * full mark_inode_dirty() is overkill. A mark_inode_dirty_sync(), on the - * other hand, is not sufficient, because I_DIRTY_DATASYNC needs to be set to - * ensure ->write_inode is called from generic_osync_inode() and this needs to - * happen or the file data would not necessarily hit the device synchronously, - * even though the vfs inode has the O_SYNC flag set. Also, I_DIRTY_DATASYNC - * simply "feels" better than just I_DIRTY_SYNC, since the file data has not - * actually hit the block device yet, which is not what I_DIRTY_SYNC on its own - * would suggest. + * other hand, is not sufficient, because ->write_inode needs to be called even + * in case of fdatasync. This needs to happen or the file data would not + * necessarily hit the device synchronously, even though the vfs inode has the + * O_SYNC flag set. Also, I_DIRTY_DATASYNC simply "feels" better than just + * I_DIRTY_SYNC, since the file data has not actually hit the block device yet, + * which is not what I_DIRTY_SYNC on its own would suggest. */ void __mark_mft_record_dirty(ntfs_inode *ni) { -- cgit v1.2.3-59-g8ed1b