Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 05:23:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 05:23:55 -0400 Received: from www.deepbluesolutions.co.uk ([212.18.232.186]:12042 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 15 Jun 2002 05:23:55 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 10:23:53 +0100 From: Russell King To: Kevin Easton Cc: hugh@veritas.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.4.18 no timestamp update on modified mmapped files Message-ID: <20020615102352.B13440@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20020615191230.A22499@beernut.flames.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 15, 2002 at 07:12:30PM +1000, Kevin Easton wrote: > Hmm.. so how do such pages get marked dirty on architectures that don't > do it in hardware ("most RISC architectures" according to a comment in > memory.c)? Is the entire mapping made dirty when the write permissions > are added? No. You only give user space write access when the write access _and_ "Linux dirty bit" are set. This means you fault when user space tries to write to the page, which means you can set the dirty bit. This is what the following code is doing (if write_access is required and the pte already has write permission, then set the dirty bit): if (write_access) { if (!pte_write(entry)) return do_wp_page(mm, vma, address, pte, pmd, entry); entry = pte_mkdirty(entry); } -- Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html - 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/