From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: Why doesn't zap_pte_range() call page_mkwrite()
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 12:31:49 -0400
Message-ID: <20090908163149.GB2975@think>
References: <1240510668.11148.40.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
 <E1Lx4yU-0007A8-Gl@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
 <1240519320.5602.9.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
 <E1LxFd4-0008Ih-Rd@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
 <20090424104137.GA7601@sgi.com>
 <E1LxMlO-0000sU-1J@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
 <1240592448.4946.35.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org>
 <20090425051028.GC10088@wotan.suse.de>
 <20090908153007.GB2513@think>
 <20090908154132.GC29902@wotan.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, holt@sgi.com,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Return-path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090908154132.GC29902@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-nfs.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 05:41:32PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 11:30:07AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > > > As I said, I think I can fix the NFS problem by simply unmapping the
> > > > page inside ->writepage() whenever we know the write request was
> > > > originally set up by a page fault.
> > > 
> > > The biggest outstanding problem we have remaining is get_user_pages.
> > > Callers are only required to hold a ref on the page and then they
> > > can call set_page_dirty at any point after that.
> > > 
> > > I have a half-done patch somewhere to add a put_user_pages, and then
> > > we could probably go from there to pinning the fs metadata (whether
> > > by using the page lock or something else, I don't quite know).
> > 
> > Hi everyone,
> > 
> > Sorry for digging up an old thread, but is there any reason we can't
> > just use page_mkwrite here?  I'd love to get rid of the btrfs code to
> > detect places that use set_page_dirty without a page_mkwrite.
> 
> It is because page_mkwrite must be called before the page is dirtied
> (it may fail, it theoretically may do something crazy with the previous
> clean page data). And in several places I think it gets called from a
> nasty context.
> 
> It hasn't fallen completely off my radar. fsblock has the same issue
> (although I've just been ignoring gup writes into fsblock fs for the
> time being).

Ok, I'll change my detection code a bit then.

> 
> I have a basic idea of what to do... It would be nice to change calling
> convention of get_user_pages and take the page lock. Database people might
> scream, in which case we could only take the page lock for filesystems that
> define ->page_mkwrite (so shared mem segments avoid the overhead). Lock
> ordering might get a bit interesting, but if we can have callers ensure they
> always submit and release partially fulfilled requirests, then we can always
> trylock them.

I think everyone will have page_mkwrite eventually, at least everyone
who the databases will care about ;)

-chris

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>