Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:17:30 +0530 (IST) | | From | V Ganesh <> | | Subject | Re: inode->i_dirty_buffers redundant ? |
| |
Stephen C. Tweedie <sct@redhat.com> wrote: : Hi,
: On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 03:25:16PM +0530, V Ganesh wrote: :> now that we have inode->i_mapping->dirty_pages, what do we need :> inode->i_dirty_buffers for ?
: Metadata. Specifically, directory contents and indirection blocks.
: --Stephen
ah, mark_buffer_dirty_inode(). thanks. so if I understand it, 1. read() and mmap read faults will put the page in i_mapping->clean_pages 2. mmaped writes will (eventually, from msync or unmap or swapout) put the page in i_mapping->dirty_pages 3. write() will put pages into i_dirty_buffers (__block_commit_write() calls buffer_insert_inode_queue()).
so i_dirty_buffers contains buffer_heads of pages coming from write() as well as metadata buffers from mark_buffer_dirty_inode(). a dirty MAP_SHARED page which has been write()n to will potentially exist in both lists. won't doing a set_dirty_page() instead of buffer_insert_inode_queue() in __block_commit_write() make things much simpler ? then we'd have i_dirty_buffers having _only_ metadata, and all data pages in the i_mapping->*_pages lists.
ganesh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |