lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mm: prevent concurrent unmap_mapping_range() on the same inode
From
Date
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 15:12 -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> In his [2/8] mm: remove i_mmap_mutex lockbreak patch, Peter says
> "shouldn't hold up reclaim more than lock_page() would". But (apart
> from a write error case) we always use trylock_page() in reclaim, we
> never dare hold it up on a lock_page().

D'0h! I so missed that, ok fixed up the changelog.

> So page reclaim would get
> held up on truncation more than at present - though he's right to
> point out that truncation will usually be freeing pages much faster.

*phew* :-)


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-03-02 10:51    [W:0.041 / U:1.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site