Re: [PATCH] Re: test10-pre7

From: Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Date: Mon Oct 30 2000 - 17:06:55 EST


On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Alexander Viro wrote:

> The last one is in deactivate_page_nolock() - there we check the
> ->mapping without pagecache_lock and without page lock. Hell
> knows whether it's a bug or not. Rik?

Shouldn't be a problem, since we'll have the lock at a time
we actually /do/ something with those pointers.

In deactivate_page_nolock(), all we can modify is the list
in which the page resides, the flags indicating on which
list the page is and the referenced bit + page age. No other
stuff is touched.

Furthermore, the locking order (first pagecache lock, then
the page_list_lock) would make it difficult to do this right...

regards,

Rik

--
"What you're running that piece of shit Gnome?!?!"
       -- Miguel de Icaza, UKUUG 2000

http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 21:00:28 EST