lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: set_page_dirty/page_launder deadlock
On 19 Jan 2001, Christoph Rohland wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > Well, as the new shm code doesn't return 1 any more, the whole
> > locked page handling should just be deleted. ramfs always just
> > re-marked the page dirty in its own "writepage()" function, so it
> > was only shmfs that ever returned this special case, and because of
> > other issues it already got excised by Christoph..
>
> No, that's not completely right. There may be rare cases like out of
> swap that shmem_write does return 1. But couldn't it simply set the
> page dirty like ramfs_writepage?

I notice that shmem_writepage() in 2.4.1-pre10 is still doing an
early "return 1" without UnlockPage(page): surely that's wrong?

Hugh

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.077 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site