From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Piggin Subject: Re: [patch 2/8] mm: write_cache_pages AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE fix Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 15:05:55 +1100 Message-ID: <200810111505.55812.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> References: <20081009155039.139856823@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Miklos Szeredi , npiggin@suse.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mpatocka@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Hugh Dickins Return-path: Received: from smtp116.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.84.165]:47374 "HELO smtp116.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750716AbYJKEGH (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:06:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Saturday 11 October 2008 05:29, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, npiggin@suse.de wrote: > > > In write_cache_pages, if AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE is returned, the > > > filesystem is calling on us to drop the page lock and retry, > > > > Are you sure? It's not what fs.h says. I think this return value is > > related to reclaim (and only used by shmfs), and retrying is not the > > right thing in that case. Oh, you're absolutely right about that. Sorry, I confused it with another AOP flag :( Thanks... > Only used by shmfs nowadays, yes; it means go away for now, > don't keep on spamming me with this, but try it again later on. > > Though I didn't invent it, it's very much my fault that it > still exists: I've had a patch to remove it (setting PageActive > instead, ending that horrid "but in this case, return with the > page still locked") for about a year, but still hadn't got around > to verifying that it really does what's intended, before the more > interesting split-lru changes reached -mm, and I thought it polite > to hold off for now (though in fact there's almost no conflict). > I'll get there... No big deal.