[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a4e6962a0702131807n30b08dd6na2e0bbd53c6b9600@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:07:44 -0600
From: "Eric Van Hensbergen" <ericvh@...il.com>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] 9p: add write-cache support to loose cache mode
On 2/13/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:55:31 -0600 Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com> wrote:
> > +int v9fs_prepare_write(struct file *file, struct page *page,
> > + unsigned from, unsigned to)
> > +{
> > + if (!PageUptodate(page)) {
> > + if (to - from != PAGE_CACHE_SIZE) {
> > + void *kaddr = kmap_atomic(page, KM_USER0);
> > + memset(kaddr, 0, from);
> > + memset(kaddr + to, 0, PAGE_CACHE_SIZE - to);
> > + flush_dcache_page(page);
> > + kunmap_atomic(kaddr, KM_USER0);
> > + }
> > + SetPageUptodate(page);
> > + }
>
> This will mark the page uptodate while the piece between `to' and `from' is
> uninitialised. A concurrent pagefault can come in and permit a read of
> that uninitialised data. Because filemap_nopage() doesn't lock the page if
> it is uptodate.
>
Okay - I snagged this code from fs/libfs.c (simple_prepare_write) --
is that code also not correct, or am I just using it in the wrong
context?
-eric
-
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