linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: prevent concurrent unmap_mapping

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1299059296.2428.13483.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 02 Mar 2011 10:48:16 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	hch@...radead.org, gurudas.pai@...cle.com,
	lkml20101129@...ton.leun.net, rjw@...k.pl, florian@...kler.org,
	trond.myklebust@....uio.no, maciej.rutecki@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: prevent concurrent unmap_mapping_range() on the
 same inode

On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 15:12 -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> 
> In his [2/8] mm: remove i_mmap_mutex lockbreak patch, Peter says
> "shouldn't hold up reclaim more than lock_page() would".  But (apart
> from a write error case) we always use trylock_page() in reclaim, we
> never dare hold it up on a lock_page(). 

D'0h! I so missed that, ok fixed up the changelog.

>  So page reclaim would get
> held up on truncation more than at present - though he's right to
> point out that truncation will usually be freeing pages much faster.

*phew* :-)
--
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/