Re: BUG() hit with ramfs usage (v 2.4.0test1-ac18)

From: Juan J. Quintela (quintela@fi.udc.es)
Date: Thu Jun 15 2000 - 06:56:28 EST


>>>>> "alexander" == Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu> writes:

Hi al

>> The thing that makes me wonder a bit is, in ramfs/inode.c
>> SetPageDirty is called, but never ClearPageDirty, but then again, i really
>> have not looked long enough to understand the code.

alexander> You had not. The thing has _no_ backing store, so all data is in
alexander> pagecache. IOW, you should keep it there until you finally dispose of a
alexander> page - there will be no place to reread it from.

As I stated in one previous mail to the list, the problem is that we
didn't Clear the dirty bit in truncate_inode_pages and we should do.
We introduced the check for dirty bits with the deferred swap
changes. Until that moment we had a leak for ramfs. (And a nasty one
to found). See rik mail about that.

Later, Juan.

-- 
In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they 
are different -- Larry McVoy

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:35 EST