[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061012154057.GC18463@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 17:40:57 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/5] mm: fault vs invalidate/truncate race fix
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 08:37:39AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
> >
> > > Are you saying that something like this would be preferable?
> >
> > I think so, it is neater and clearer. I actually didn't even bother relocking
> > and checking the page again on readpage error so got rid of quite a bit of
> > code.
>
> Well, the readpage error should be rare (and for the _normal_ case we just
> do the "wait_on_page_locked()" thing). And I think we should lock the page
> in order to do the truncation check, no?
Definitely.
> But I don't have any really strong feelings. I'm certainly ok with the
> patch I sent out. How about putting it through -mm? Here's my sign-off:
>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
>
> if you want to send it off to Andrew (or if Andrew wants to just take it
> himself ;)
OK... maybe it can wait till the other changes, and we can think about
it then. I'll carry around the split out patct, though.
> Btw, how did you even notice this? Just by reading the source, or because
> you actually saw multiple errors reported?
Reading the source, thinking about the cleanups we can do if filemap_nopage
takes the page lock...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists