On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:05:13 -0500
Trond Myklebust <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 08:46 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > but nobody could have started another writeback after the "..." because they
> > couldn't have got the lock_page(), and lock_page() is required for
> > ->writepage()?
>
> Nothing can have called writepage(), but something may be calling
> ->writepages(). That may call set_page_writeback without taking the page
> lock.
>
The protocol is
lock_page()
set_page_writeback()
->writepage()
and there are various places which assume that nobody will start new
writeout of a locked page. But I forget where they are - things have always
been this way.
If NFS is running set_page_writeback() against an unlocked page then I
don't know what will break. I didn't know it was doing that.
-
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]
