[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2889872.1676993446@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 15:30:46 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
"Vishal Moola (Oracle)" <vishal.moola@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
Steve French <stfrench@...rosoft.com>,
Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@...il.com>,
Rohith Surabattula <rohiths.msft@...il.com>,
Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>, Paulo Alcantara <pc@....nz>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Obsolete comment on page swizzling (written by Hugh)?
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > + /* At this point we hold neither the i_pages lock nor the
> > > + * page lock: the page may be truncated or invalidated
> > > + * (changing page->mapping to NULL), or even swizzled
> > > + * back from swapper_space to tmpfs file mapping
> >
> > Where does this comment come from? This is cifs, not tmpfs. You'll
> > never be asked to writeback a page from the swap cache. Dirty pages
> > can be truncated, so the first half of the comment is still accurate.
> > I'd rather it moved down to below the folio lock, and was rephrased
> > so it described why we're checking everything again.
>
> Actually, it's in v6.2 cifs and I just move it in the patch where I copy the
> afs writepages implementation into cifs. afs got it in 2007 when I added
> write support[1] and I suspect I copied it from cifs. cifs got it in 2005
> when Steve added writepages support[2]. I think he must've got it from
> fs/mpage.c and the comment there is prehistoric.
The ultimate source is Hugh Dickins, it would seem:
commit 820ef9df32856bb54fe5bc995153feb276420e15
Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@...eo.com>
Date: Fri Nov 15 18:52:38 2002 -0800
[PATCH] handle pages which alter their ->mapping
Patch from Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
tmpfs failed fsx+swapout tests after many hours, a page found zeroed.
Not a truncate problem, but mirror image of earlier truncate problems:
swap goes through mpage_writepages, which must therefore allow for a
sudden swizzle back to file identity.
Second time this caught us, so I've audited the tree for other places
which might be surprised by such swizzling. The only others I found
were (perhaps) in the parisc and sparc64 flush_dcache_page called
from do_generic_mapping_read on a looped tmpfs file which is also
mmapped; but that's a very marginal case, I wanted to understand it
better before making any edit, and now realize that hch's sendfile
in loop eliminates it (now go through do_shmem_file_read instead:
similar but crucially this locks the page when raising its count,
which is enough to keep vmscan from interfering).
Maybe we should delete or amend the comment now?
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists