Re: page_mkwrite caller is racy?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Mark Fasheh wrote:


No page lock please. Generally, Ocfs2 wants to order cluster locks outside
of page locks. Also, the sparse b-tree support I'm working on right now will
need to be able to allocate in ->page_mkwrite() which would become very
nasty if we came in with the page lock - aside from the additional cluster
locks taken, ocfs2 will want to zero some adjacent pages (because we support
atomic allocation up to 1 meg).


Ditto for NTFS. I will need to lock pages on both sides of the page for large volume cluster sizes thus I will have to drop the page lock if it is already taken so it might as well not be... Although I do not feel strongly about it. If the page is locked I will just drop the lock and then take it again. If possible to not have the page locked that would make my code a little easier/more efficient I expect...

OK, that makes sense. Thanks to you both.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux