Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 08:18 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
Trond Myklebust wrote:
No. Invalidatepage does precisely the wrong thing: it invalidates dirty
data instead of committing it to disk. If you need to have the data
invalidated, then you should call truncate_inode_pages().
Just curious... would it make sense to call truncate_inode_pages()
to purge the the readdir cache? Meaning, in nfs_revalidate_mapping()
truncate_inode_pages() would be called for S_ISDIR inodes?
Why? If, as in the case of an NFS directory, there are no dirty pages
then the two are supposed to be 100% equivalent.
Well as you know, lately we've had problems with
invalidate_inode_pages2() failing to invalidate pages (regardless of
their state). So I was thinking truncate_inode_pages() might be
better for directories since there seem to be more a guarantee that
the pages will be gone with truncate_inode_pages() than
invalidate_inode_pages2() (due to the fact there will not be any
dirty pages).
But since you have to call truncate_inode_pages under the
inode->i_mutex, there might be a performance hit...
steved.
-
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]
