linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 13 Feb 2007 06:52:29 +0100
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To:	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
	Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 11:44:55PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:31 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390 page_test_and_clear_dirty, so
> > I'd like to make sure that's OK.
> 
> An I/O operation on s390 will set the dirty bit for a page. That is the

Oh, OK.

> reason to have SetPageUptodate clear the per page dirty bit when the
> page is made uptodate the first time. Otherwise we end up writing each
> page back to its backing device at least once. If SetNewPageUptodate is
> used on new anonymous pages exclusively I don't see a problem in
> omitting the page_test_clear_dirty.

Thanks for the confirmation.

I'll obviously have to resend a new patchset because I made a silly
paper-bag bug with this one. May I say that the s390 specific part of
the change is acked-by: you?
-
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/