lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: invalidate_inode_pages2
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 06:00:28PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> OK. Can we do a full pte invalidation and force a major fault?

we'd need to take the page_table_lock to do that from there, I find
safer to stay at the pagecache layer at that point inside the nfs
filesystem routines. the semantics of invalidate_inode_pages2 doesn't
require a synchronous invalidate with major fault, both O_DIRECT and nfs
cannot provide distributed shared memory anyways, all it matters is that
_future_ reads will trigger readpage again to provide inode invalidate
semantics.

> > > It's currently the case that pages which are mapped into process pagetables
> > > are always up to date, which sounds like a good invariant to have. This
> >
> > I already intentionally broke that invariant in 2.4 just to make exactly
> > this thing work safely, this is needed for correct O_DIRECT semantics
> > too.
> >
> > All it matters is that the pages are re-read after munmap+mmap.
> >
> > > changes that rule. I dunno if it'll break anything though.
> >
> > It didn't break anything in 2.4 AFIK.
>
> It might have caused some of the debug checks in fs/buffer.c to get angry
> when it's used by direct-IO. But they're gone now anyway...

sounds good then ;)
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:03    [W:0.039 / U:1.760 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site