[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710222101420.23513@blonde.wat.veritas.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 21:16:17 +0100 (BST)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
cc: Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>, Ryan Finnie <ryan@...nie.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
cjwatson@...ntu.com, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: msync(2) bug(?), returns AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE to userland
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007, Pekka Enberg wrote:
>
> I wonder whether _not setting_ BDI_CAP_NO_WRITEBACK implies that
> ->writepage() will never return AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE for
> !wbc->for_reclaim case which would explain why we haven't hit this bug
> before. Hugh, Andrew?
Only ramdisk and shmem have been returning AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE.
Both of those set BDI_CAP_NO_WRITEBACK. ramdisk never returned it
if !wbc->for_reclaim. I contend that shmem shouldn't either: it's
a special code to get the LRU rotation right, not useful elsewhere.
Though Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt does imply wider use.
I think this is where people use the phrase "go figure" ;)
Hugh
-
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