Re: invalidate_inode_pages in 2.5.32/3

Daniel Phillips
2002-09-11T00:56:31Z

On Wednesday 11 September 2002 02:38, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> >
> > > ...
> > We do get
> > around to walking the ptes at file close I believe. Is that not driven by
> > zap_page_range, which moves any orphaned pte dirty bits down into the struct
> > page?
>
> Nope, close will just leave all the pages pte-dirty or PageDirty in
> memory. truncate will nuke all the ptes and then the pagecache.
>
> But the normal way in which pte-dirty pages find their way to the
> backing file is:
>
> - page reclaim runs try_to_unmap or
>
> - user runs msync(). (Which will only clean that mm's ptes!)
>
> These will run set_page_dirty(), making the page visible to
> one of the many things which run writeback.

So we just quietly drop any dirty memory mapped to a file if the user doesn't
run msync? Is that correct behaviour? It sure sounds wrong.

--
Daniel