lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: invalidate_inode_pages in 2.5.32/3
Date
On Tuesday 10 September 2002 00:03, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> >
> > > I'm very unkeen about using the inaccurate invalidate_inode_pages
> > > for anything which matters, really. And the consistency of pagecache
> > > data matters.
> > >
> > > NFS should be using something stronger. And that's basically
> > > vmtruncate() without the i_size manipulation.
> >
> > Yes, that looks good. Semantics are basically "and don't come back
> > until every damm page is gone" which is enforced by the requirement
> > that we hold the mapping->page_lock though one entire scan of the
> > truncated region. (Yes, I remember sweating this one out a year
> > or two ago so it doesn't eat 100% CPU on regular occasions.)
> >
> > So, specifically, we want:
> >
> > void invalidate_inode_pages(struct inode *inode)
> > {
> > truncate_inode_pages(mapping, 0);
> > }
> >
> > Is it any harder than that?
>
> Pretty much - need to leave i_size where it was.

This doesn't touch i_size.

> But there are
> apparently reasons why NFS cannot sleepingly lock pages in this particular
> context.

If only we knew what those were. It's hard to keep the word 'bogosity'
from popping into my head.

--
Daniel
-
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 13:28    [W:0.122 / U:0.836 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site