Re: [BUG] Non-chronological ordering of dirty buffers

[Tigran Aivazian]

On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, David S. Miller wrote:
> I can't see any real benefit to the different flushtime settings for
> sb vs. non-sb dirty buffers.  Just use the same value for both types,
> I doubt it really matters at all.

If so, then a better fix would be to go through all filesystems and all
other users of mark_buffer_dirty(bh, flag) and change them to
mark_buffer_dirty(bh) - i.e. remove the flag argument altogether. If it
stays but has no effect it will only confuse the matters.

Also, the age_super parameter for bdflush must be replaced with 'dummy1'
in fs/buffer.c.

Do you agree with this? I can make this patch and test it quickly.

Regards,
Tigran