Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759356AbXJYFhi (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:37:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754848AbXJYFh2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:37:28 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.190]:9854 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753624AbXJYFh1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:37:27 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=k8U91ytkT89sB59erdcU6DPtz3aEr5HQE7UHUvXhwLQczMlY8nIC7ZKA3D6pSG7yq0mkGEpq9/napwcyDWqm98Hs5ttddGnW4ZXXHr3K//IF/xryM6AIuNlB1aF2QpBFgwCc+X22qCeZc5KKzJtAfZUq+mqz6ljOCpI+RFWUEr4= Message-ID: <84144f020710242237q3aa8e96dtc8cf3f02f2af2cc9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:37:26 +0300 From: "Pekka Enberg" To: "Hugh Dickins" Subject: Re: [PATCH+comment] fix tmpfs BUG and AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE Cc: "Andrew Morton" , ezk@cs.sunysb.edu, ryan@finnie.org, mhalcrow@us.ibm.com, cjwatson@ubuntu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@kernel.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200710142232.l9EMW8kK029572@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu> <84144f020710150447o94b1babo8b6e6a647828465f@mail.gmail.com> <20071024140836.a0098180.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7c513df83016214a Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1215 Lines: 27 Hi Hugh, On 10/25/07, Hugh Dickins wrote: > --- 2.6.24-rc1/mm/shmem.c 2007-10-24 07:16:04.000000000 +0100 > +++ linux/mm/shmem.c 2007-10-24 22:31:09.000000000 +0100 > @@ -915,6 +915,21 @@ static int shmem_writepage(struct page * > struct inode *inode; > > BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page)); > + /* > + * shmem_backing_dev_info's capabilities prevent regular writeback or > + * sync from ever calling shmem_writepage; but a stacking filesystem > + * may use the ->writepage of its underlying filesystem, in which case I find the above bit somewhat misleading as it implies that the !wbc->for_reclaim case can be removed after ecryptfs has similar fix as unionfs. Can we just say that while BDI_CAP_NO_WRITEBACK does prevent some callers from entering ->writepage(), it's just an optimization and ->writepage() must deal with !wbc->for_reclaim case properly? Pekka - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/