On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 19:18 -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 16:09 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Trond Myklebust <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > The only difference I can see between the two paths is the call to
> > > unmap_mapping_range(). What effect would that have?
> >
> > It shoots down any mapped pagecache over the affected file region. Because
> > the direct-io write is about to make that pagecache out-of-date. If the
> > application tries to use that data again it'll get a major fault and will
> > re-read the file contents.
>
> I assume then, that this couldn't be the cause of the
> invalidate_inode_pages() failing to complete? Unless there is some
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ invalidate_inode_pages2(), sorry....
> method to prevent applications from faulting in the page while we're
> inside generic_file_direct_IO(), then the same race would be able to
> occur there.
Cheers,
Trond
-
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/
- References:
- Re: infinite loop? with mmap, nfs, pwrite, O_DIRECT
- Re: infinite loop? with mmap, nfs, pwrite, O_DIRECT
- Re: infinite loop? with mmap, nfs, pwrite, O_DIRECT
- Re: infinite loop? with mmap, nfs, pwrite, O_DIRECT
- Re: infinite loop? with mmap, nfs, pwrite, O_DIRECT
- Re: infinite loop? with mmap, nfs, pwrite, O_DIRECT
[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]