[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130409140432.cd69f999302a02caf73788fc@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 14:04:32 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Shuge <shugelinux@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
Kevin <kevin@...winnertech.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] [RESEND] mm: Make snapshotting pages for stable
writes a per-bio operation
On Tue, 9 Apr 2013 11:06:17 -0700 "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com> wrote:
> + * Here we write back pagecache data that may be mmaped. Since
> + * we cannot afford to clean the page and set PageWriteback
> + * here due to lock ordering (page lock ranks above transaction
> + * start), the data can change while IO is in flight. Tell the
> + * block layer it should bounce the bio pages if stable data
> + * during write is required.
I think there are already ab/ba deadlocks between lock_page() and
journal_start(). iirc one path was write(), I forget which was the
other path. This was 10+ years ago and nobody else noticed and I
didn't know how to fix it so I didn't tell anyone ;)
It would be neat to be able to hook things like journal_start() into
lockdep but I don't think that lockdep has easy provision for wiring
oddball things into its mechanisms.
--
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