Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: aio on ramfs | From | OGAWA Hirofumi <> | Date | Mon, 08 Dec 2003 03:55:40 +0900 |
| |
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> writes:
> William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> writes: > >> +static int ramfs_writepage(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc) > >> +{ > >> + return 0; > >> +} > > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 02:40:03AM +0900, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote: > > Doesn't this break the magic of shrink_list()? I think it need the > > "return WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE;" at least. > > In truth these things shouldn't be on the LRU at all, though they're > probably blindly plopped down there. My handwavy argument was that it > makes no sense to do anything with it on the LRU and that I'd nopped > out ->set_page_dirty() anyhow (i.e. PG_dirty should never get set). Does > that hold enough water or should I still hand back WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE?
I see. Sorry for noise. -- OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> - 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/
| |