From: Boaz Harrosh Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] fs: Fix remaining filesystems to wait for stable page writeback Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 15:23:54 -0700 Message-ID: <5092F67A.2060203@panasas.com> References: <20121101075805.16153.64714.stgit@blackbox.djwong.org> <20121101075829.16153.92036.stgit@blackbox.djwong.org> <5092C2CE.7070209@panasas.com> <20121101162254.03dbbd9a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , To: Jeff Layton Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121101162254.03dbbd9a@tlielax.poochiereds.net> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On 11/01/2012 01:22 PM, Jeff Layton wrote: > Hmm...I don't know... > > I've never been crazy about using the page lock for this, but in the > absence of a better way to guarantee stable pages, it was what I ended > up with at the time. cifs_writepages will hold the page lock until > kernel_sendmsg returns. At that point the TCP layer will have copied > off the page data so it's safe to release it. > > With this change though, we're going to end up blocking until the > writeback flag clears, right? And I think that will happen when the > reply comes in? So, we'll end up blocking for much longer than is > really necessary in page_mkwrite with this change. > Hmm OK, that is a very good point. In that case it is just a simple nack on Darrick's hunk to cifs. cifs is fine and should not be touched Boaz -- 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: email@kvack.org