[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090615081453.GC8665@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 10:14:53 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"riel@...hat.com" <riel@...hat.com>,
"chris.mason@...cle.com" <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/22] HWPOISON: Intro (v5)
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 08:44:47AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Did we verify with filesystem maintainers (eg. btrfs) that the
> !ISREG test will be enough to prevent oopses?
BTW. this is quite a significant change I think and not
really documented well enough. Previously a filesystem
will know exactly when and why pagecache in a mapping
under its control will be truncated (as opposed to
invalidated).
They even have opportunity to hold locks such as i_mutex.
And depending on what they do, they could do interesting
things even with ISREG files.
So, I really think this needs review by filesystem
maintainers and it would be far safer to use invalidate
until it is known to be safe.
--
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