Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Mar 2004 21:05:05 +0100 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: VMA_MERGING_FIXUP and patch |
| |
On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 11:57:34AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > set_page_dirty() takes ->tree_lock and inode_lock. tree_lock surely is OK > and while I cannot think of any deadlocks which could occur with taking > inode_lock inside the rmap lock, it doesn't sound very nice. > > It would of course be best if we could avoid adding a new ranking > relationship between these locks.
agreed. the inode_lock especially is more a vfs thing than a mm thing, so it lives quite far away. (btw, in my last email I only mentioned the mapping tree_lock because I was thinking at the swapcache, with filebacked pagecache and the inode_lock it gets worse, probably still ok today though) - 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/
| |