[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0801180949040.2957@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:58:04 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, salikhmetov@...il.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, jakob@...hought.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, valdis.kletnieks@...edu,
riel@...hat.com, ksm@...dk, staubach@...hat.com,
jesper.juhl@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
protasnb@...il.com, r.e.wolff@...wizard.nl,
hidave.darkstar@...il.com, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v6 2/2] Updating ctime and mtime for memory-mapped
files
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Bah, and will break on s390... so we'd need a page_mkclean() variant
> that doesn't actually clear dirty.
No, we simply want to not play all these very expensive games with dirty
in the first place.
Guys, mmap access times aren't important enough for this. It's not
specified closely enough, and people don't care enough.
Of the patches around so far, the best one by far seems to be the simple
four-liner from Miklos.
And even in that four-liner, I suspect that the *last* two lines are
actually incorrect: there's no point in updating the file time when the
page *becomes* dirty, we should update the file time when it is marked
clean, and "msync(MS_SYNC)" should update it as part of *that*.
So I think the file time update should be part of just the page writeout
logic, not by msync() or page faulting itself or anything like that.
Linus
--
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