All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch resend v4] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:10:09 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070326211008.GS10459@waste.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070326140036.f3352f81.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 02:00:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:10:21 +0200
> Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> 
> > This patch makes writing to shared memory mappings update st_ctime and
> > st_mtime as defined by SUSv3:
> 
> Boy this is complicated.
> 
> Is there a simpler way of doing all this?  Say, we define a new page flag
> PG_dirtiedbywrite and we do SetPageDirtiedByWrite() inside write() and
> ClearPageDirtiedByWrite() whenever we propagate pte-dirtiness into
> page-dirtiness.  Then, when performing writeback we look to see if any of
> the dirty pages are !PageDirtiedByWrite() and, if so, we update [mc]time to
> current-time.
> 
> Or something like that - I'm just thinking out loud and picking holes in
> the above doesn't shut me up ;) We're adding complexity and some overhead
> and we're losing our recent msync() simplifications and this all hurts.  Is
> there some other way?  I think burning a page flag to avoid this additional
> complexity would be worthwhile.  

Aren't we basically out of those?

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch resend v4] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:10:09 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070326211008.GS10459@waste.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070326140036.f3352f81.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

On Mon, Mar 26, 2007 at 02:00:36PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:10:21 +0200
> Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> 
> > This patch makes writing to shared memory mappings update st_ctime and
> > st_mtime as defined by SUSv3:
> 
> Boy this is complicated.
> 
> Is there a simpler way of doing all this?  Say, we define a new page flag
> PG_dirtiedbywrite and we do SetPageDirtiedByWrite() inside write() and
> ClearPageDirtiedByWrite() whenever we propagate pte-dirtiness into
> page-dirtiness.  Then, when performing writeback we look to see if any of
> the dirty pages are !PageDirtiedByWrite() and, if so, we update [mc]time to
> current-time.
> 
> Or something like that - I'm just thinking out loud and picking holes in
> the above doesn't shut me up ;) We're adding complexity and some overhead
> and we're losing our recent msync() simplifications and this all hurts.  Is
> there some other way?  I think burning a page flag to avoid this additional
> complexity would be worthwhile.  

Aren't we basically out of those?

-- 
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-03-26 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-03-25 21:10 [patch resend v4] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-25 21:10 ` Miklos Szeredi, Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26 21:00 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26 21:00   ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26 21:10   ` Matt Mackall [this message]
2007-03-26 21:10     ` Matt Mackall
2007-03-26 22:25     ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26 22:25       ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26 21:43   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26 21:43     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-26 22:31     ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-26 22:31       ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  6:55       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  6:55         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  7:22         ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  7:22           ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  7:36           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  7:36             ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  7:49             ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  7:49               ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  8:03               ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  8:03                 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  8:18                 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  8:18                   ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  8:28                   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  8:28                     ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  8:51                     ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  8:51                       ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27  9:23                       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27  9:23                         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27 17:52                         ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27 17:52                           ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27 18:29                           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27 18:29                             ` Miklos Szeredi
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-27 18:42 linux
2007-03-27 18:55 ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27 19:00   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27 19:05   ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27 19:24   ` linux
2007-03-27 19:34     ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27 20:09       ` linux
2007-03-27 20:09         ` linux
2007-03-27 20:31         ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-27 20:31           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-03-28  1:48           ` linux
2007-03-28  1:48             ` linux
2007-03-28  7:58             ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-28  7:58               ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-28  9:50               ` linux
2007-03-28  9:50                 ` linux
2007-03-29  4:59                 ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-29  4:59                   ` Nick Piggin
2007-03-27 20:47         ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-27 20:47           ` Andrew Morton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070326211008.GS10459@waste.org \
    --to=mpm@selenic.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.