Hi,
On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 23:50, Andrew Morton wrote:
> truncate_inode_pages_range() seems to dtrt here. Can we do it in the same
> manner in invalidate_inode_pages2_range()?
>
>
> Something like:
> - if (page->mapping != mapping || page->index > end) {
> + page_index = page->index;
> + if (page_index > end) {
> + next = page_index;
> + unlock_page(page);
> + break;
> + }
> + if (page->mapping != mapping) {
> unlock_page(page);
> continue;
> }
Yes, breaking early seems fine for this. But don't we need to test
page->mapping == mapping again with the page lock held before we can
reliably break on page_index?
I think it should be OK just to move the page->mapping != mapping test
above the page>index > end test. Sure, if all the pages have been
stolen by the time we see them, then we'll repeat without advancing
"next"; but we're still making progress in that case because pages that
were previously in this mapping *have* been removed, just by a different
process. If we're really concerned about that case we can play the
trick that invalidate_mapping_pages() tries and do a "next++" in that
case.
--Stephen
-
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/
