Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-13 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 06:52 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: > Thanks for the confirmation. > > I'll obviously have to resend a new patchset because I made a silly > paper-bag bug with this one. May I say that the s390 specific part of > the change is acked-by: you? Yes. -- blue skies, Martin.

Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-13 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 06:52 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: Thanks for the confirmation. I'll obviously have to resend a new patchset because I made a silly paper-bag bug with this one. May I say that the s390 specific part of the change is acked-by: you? Yes. -- blue skies, Martin. Martin

Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-12 Thread Nick Piggin
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 11:44:55PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:31 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: > > SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390 page_test_and_clear_dirty, so > > I'd like to make sure that's OK. > > An I/O operation on s390 will set the dirty bit for a

Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-12 Thread Nick Piggin
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 11:44:55PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:31 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390 page_test_and_clear_dirty, so I'd like to make sure that's OK. An I/O operation on s390 will set the dirty bit for a page. That

Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-10 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:31 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: > SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390 page_test_and_clear_dirty, so > I'd like to make sure that's OK. An I/O operation on s390 will set the dirty bit for a page. That is the reason to have SetPageUptodate clear the per page dirty bit when

Re: [patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-10 Thread Martin Schwidefsky
On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 03:31 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390 page_test_and_clear_dirty, so I'd like to make sure that's OK. An I/O operation on s390 will set the dirty bit for a page. That is the reason to have SetPageUptodate clear the per page dirty bit when

[patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-09 Thread Nick Piggin
OK, I have got rid of SetPageUptodate_nowarn, and removed the atomic op from SetNewPageUptodate. Made PageUptodate_NoLock only issue the memory barrier is the page was uptodate (hopefully the compiler can thread the branch into the caller's branch). SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390

[patch 0/3] 2.6.20 fix for PageUptodate memorder problem (try 3)

2007-02-09 Thread Nick Piggin
OK, I have got rid of SetPageUptodate_nowarn, and removed the atomic op from SetNewPageUptodate. Made PageUptodate_NoLock only issue the memory barrier is the page was uptodate (hopefully the compiler can thread the branch into the caller's branch). SetNewPageUptodate does not do the S390