[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <84144f020710221348x297795c0qda61046ec69a7178@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:48:37 +0300
From: "Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: "Hugh Dickins" <hugh@...itas.com>
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, neilb@...e.de
Subject: Re: msync(2) bug(?), returns AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE to userland
Hi Hugh,
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?
On 10/22/07, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com> wrote:
> 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" ;)
Heh. As far as I can tell, the implication of "wider use" was added by
Neil in commit "341546f5ad6fce584531f744853a5807a140f2a9 Update some
VFS documentation", so perhaps he might know? Neil?
Pekka
-
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