Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Sep 2002 09:42:35 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: locking rules for ->dirty_inode() |
| |
Nikita Danilov wrote: > > Andrew Morton writes: > > Nikita Danilov wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > Documentation/filesystems/Locking states that all super operations may > > > block, but __set_page_dirty_buffers() calls > > > > > > __mark_inode_dirty()->s_op->dirty_inode() > > > > > > under mapping->private_lock spin lock. > > > > Actually it doesn't. We do not call down into the filesystem > > for I_DIRTY_PAGES. > > > > set_page_dirty() is already called under locks, via __free_pte (pagetable > > teardown). 2.4 does this as well. > > Cannot find __free_pte, it is only mentioned in comments in mm/filemap.c > and include/asm-generic/tlb.h. >
It got moved around. 2.4: __free_pte(), 2.5: zap_pte_range(). - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |