On Thu, 25 May 2006, Jeff Anderson-Lee wrote:
> Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> > I am a bit confused about the need for Davids patch. set_page_dirty() is
> > already a notification that a page is to be dirtied. Why do we need it
> > twice? set_page_dirty could return an error code and the file system can
> > use the set_page_dirty() hook to get its notification. What we would need
> > to do is to make sure that set_page_dirty can sleep.
>
> set_page_dirty() is actually called fairly late in the game by
> zap_pte_range() and follow_page(). Thus, it is a notification that a page
> HAS BEEN dirtied and needs a writeback.
The tracking patch changes that behavior. set_page_dirty is called before
the write to the page occurs and so its similar to the new method
introduced by David's patch.
[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]