> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:10:25 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > The inode lock is not taken when the page is dirtied. > > > > The inode_lock is taken when the address_space's first page is dirtied. It > > is > > also taken when the address_space's last dirty page is cleaned. So the > > place > > where the inode is added to and removed from sb->s_dirty is, I think, > > exactly > > the place where we want to attach and detach > > address_space.dirty_page_nodemask. > > The problem there is that we do a GFP_ATOMIC allocation (no allocation > context) that may fail when the first page is dirtied. We must therefore > be able to subsequently allocate the nodemask_t in set_page_dirty(). > Otherwise the first failure will mean that there will never be a dirty > map for the inode/mapping.
True. But it's pretty simple to change __mark_inode_dirty() to fix this. - 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/
