[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2756052.1713308590@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 00:03:10 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>,
Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
Paulo Alcantara <pc@...guebit.com>,
Shyam Prasad N <sprasad@...rosoft.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...nel.org>,
Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>, netfs@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-cachefs@...hat.com, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org, v9fs@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net>,
Christian Schoenebeck <linux_oss@...debyte.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/26] 9p: Use alternative invalidation to using launder_folio
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org> wrote:
> Shouldn't this include a call to filemap_invalidate_inode? Is just
> removing launder_folio enough to do this?
Good point. netfs_unbuffered_write_iter() calls kiocb_invalidate_pages() -
which uses invalidate_inode_pages2_range() to discard the pagecache. It
should probably use filemap_invalidate_inode() instead.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists