lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:10:54 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com> Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, tytso@....edu, mfasheh@...e.com, jlbec@...lplan.org, matthew@....cx, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, hch@...radead.org, ngupta@...are.org, jeremy@...p.org, JBeulich@...ell.com, Kurt Hackel <kurt.hackel@...cle.com>, npiggin@...nel.dk, Dave Mccracken <dave.mccracken@...cle.com>, riel@...hat.com, avi@...hat.com, Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, mel@....ul.ie, yinghan@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 4/8] mm/fs: add hooks to support cleancache On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:47:57 -0700 (PDT) Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com> wrote: > Hi Minchan -- > > > First of all, thanks for resolving conflict with my patch. > > You're welcome! As I pointed out offlist, yours was the first > change in MM that caused any semantic changes to the cleancache > core hooks patch since before 2.6.18. > > > Before I suggested a thing about cleancache_flush_page, > > cleancache_flush_inode. > > > > what's the meaning of flush's semantic? > > I thought it means invalidation. > > AFAIC, how about change flush with invalidate? > > I'm not sure the words "flush" and "invalidate" are defined > precisely or used consistently everywhere in computer > science, but I think that "invalidate" is to destroy > a "pointer" to some data, but not necessarily destroy the > data itself. And "flush" means to actually remove > the data. So one would "invalidate a mapping" but one > would "flush a cache". > > Since cleancache_flush_page and cleancache_flush_inode > semantically remove data from cleancache, I think flush > is a better name than invalidate. > > Does that make sense? > nope ;) Kernel code freely uses "flush" to refer to both invalidation and to writeback, sometimes in confusing ways. In this case, cleancache_flush_inode and cleancache_flush_page rather sound like they might write those things to backing store. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists