From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
To: Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
cmm@us.ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, sct@redhat.com
Subject: Re: kjournald() with DIO
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 21:22:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050915192225.GJ4122@opteron.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1126796604.14837.111.camel@dyn9047017102.beaverton.ibm.com>
On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 08:03:23AM -0700, Badari Pulavarty wrote:
> FWIW, I changed it to call truncate_complete_page() and the tests ran
> fine overnight.
What is the main difference between the two? (besides the removal of
of the pagecache that isn't interesting here). That it calls
->invalidatepage (ext3_invalidatepage) instead of ->releasepage?
->invalidatepage must be freeing the buffers too (the fs thinks the data
block will be released) so why is there a difference between
->releasepage and ->invalidatepage in the first place? What if you
define both of them to the invalidatepage implementation? (with a local
change to ext3 calling ext3_invalidatepage with offset = 0 inside
ext3_releasepage, the gfpmask should also be checked but that's not
important for now)
Just trying to understand why truncatepage blocks and waits, and
releasepage doesn't (which seems the reason why we have a problem in the
first place).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-15 19:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-12 23:23 kjournald() with DIO Badari Pulavarty
2005-09-12 23:37 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-13 0:06 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-09-13 0:29 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-13 16:52 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-09-13 23:07 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-14 17:23 ` Mingming Cao
2005-09-14 18:18 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-14 21:40 ` Mingming Cao
2005-09-14 22:02 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-15 11:11 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2005-09-15 18:52 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-15 15:03 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-09-15 19:22 ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2005-09-15 20:00 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-15 20:20 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-09-15 20:35 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-15 20:49 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-09-15 21:06 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-09-15 21:20 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-15 22:22 ` Badari Pulavarty
2005-09-15 21:03 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-09-15 21:26 ` Andrew Morton
2005-09-15 22:04 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-09-15 23:28 ` Mingming Cao
2005-09-16 0:18 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2005-09-13 17:53 ` Mingming Cao
2005-09-16 13:42 ` Stephen C. Tweedie
2005-09-21 18:22 ` Mingming Cao
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=20050915192225.GJ4122@opteron.random \
--to=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=cmm@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbadari@us.ibm.com \
--cc=sct@redhat.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).