[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <555896EB.7040002@plexistor.com>
Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 16:26:03 +0300
From: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Daniel Phillips <daniel@...nq.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
CC: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, tux3@...3.org,
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [FYI] tux3: Core changes
On 05/14/2015 03:59 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 05/14/2015 04:26 AM, Daniel Phillips wrote:
>> Hi Rik,
<>
>
> The issue is that things like ptrace, AIO, infiniband
> RDMA, and other direct memory access subsystems can take
> a reference to page A, which Tux3 clones into a new page B
> when the process writes it.
>
> However, while the process now points at page B, ptrace,
> AIO, infiniband, etc will still be pointing at page A.
>
All these problems can also happen with truncate+new-extending-write
It is the responsibility of the application to take file/range locks
to prevent these page-pinned problems.
> This causes the process and the other subsystem to each
> look at a different page, instead of at shared state,
> causing ptrace to do nothing, AIO and RDMA data to be
> invisible (or corrupted), etc...
>
Again these problems already exist. Consider each in-place-write
being a truncate (punch hole) + new-write is that not the same?
Cheers
Boaz
--
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