[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871v135xvj.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 00:37:36 +0900
From: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, tytso@....edu, mfasheh@...e.com,
jlbec@...lplan.org, matthew@....cx, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com,
linux-mm@...ck.org, hch@...radead.org, ngupta@...are.org,
jeremy@...p.org, JBeulich@...ell.com,
Kurt Hackel <kurt.hackel@...cle.com>, npiggin@...nel.dk,
Dave Mccracken <dave.mccracken@...cle.com>, riel@...hat.com,
avi@...hat.com, Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
mel@....ul.ie, yinghan@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 4/8] mm/fs: add hooks to support cleancache
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
>> > Before I suggested a thing about cleancache_flush_page,
>> > cleancache_flush_inode.
>> >
>> > what's the meaning of flush's semantic?
>> > I thought it means invalidation.
>> > AFAIC, how about change flush with invalidate?
>>
>> I'm not sure the words "flush" and "invalidate" are defined
>> precisely or used consistently everywhere in computer
>> science, but I think that "invalidate" is to destroy
>> a "pointer" to some data, but not necessarily destroy the
>> data itself. And "flush" means to actually remove
>> the data. So one would "invalidate a mapping" but one
>> would "flush a cache".
>>
>> Since cleancache_flush_page and cleancache_flush_inode
>> semantically remove data from cleancache, I think flush
>> is a better name than invalidate.
>>
>> Does that make sense?
>>
>
> nope ;)
>
> Kernel code freely uses "flush" to refer to both invalidation and to
> writeback, sometimes in confusing ways. In this case,
> cleancache_flush_inode and cleancache_flush_page rather sound like they
> might write those things to backing store.
I'd like to mention about *_{get,put}_page too. In linux get/put is not
meaning read/write. There is {get,put}_page those are refcount stuff
(Yeah, and I felt those methods does refcount by quick read. But it
seems to be false. There is no xen codes, so I don't know actually
though.).
And I agree, I also think the needing thing is consistency on the linux
codes (term).
Thanks.
--
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
--
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