[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Subjectpage_mkwrite seems broken
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Hugh Dickins wrote in another thread:
> Isn't this exactly what David Howells' page_mkwrite stuff in -mm's
> add-page-becoming-writable-notification.patch is designed for?
> Though it looks a little broken to me as it stands (beyond the two
> fixup patches already there). I've not found time to double-check
> or test, apologies in advance if I'm libelling, but...
> (a) I thought the prot bits do_nopage gives a pte in a shared writable
> mapping include write permission, even when it's a read fault:
> that can't be allowed if there's a page_mkwrite.
> (b) I don't understand how do_wp_page's "reuse" logic for whether it
> can just go ahead and use the existing anonymous page, would have
> any relevance to calling page_mkwrite on a shared writable page,
> which must be used and not COWed however many references there are.

I have now looked further, and both points still seem valid to me:
the page_mkwrite calling code looks doubly broken. (Tested?)

Nor has there been any movement on the points raised by Christoph,
that aops->page_mkwrite is redundant, and do_wp_page_mk_pte_writable
separation unhelpful.

I could probably put page_mkwrite to use in tmpfs (to eliminate its
unsatisfactory but never over-troubling shmem_recalc_inode), but not
as it currently stands.

Are you planning any movement on this, David?
Or should I have a go sometime?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.056 / U:10.472 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site