On Saturday 11 October 2008 05:29, Hugh Dickins wrote: > On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Oct 2008, npiggin@xxxxxxx wrote: > > > In write_cache_pages, if AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE is returned, the > > > filesystem is calling on us to drop the page lock and retry, > > > > Are you sure? It's not what fs.h says. I think this return value is > > related to reclaim (and only used by shmfs), and retrying is not the > > right thing in that case. Oh, you're absolutely right about that. Sorry, I confused it with another AOP flag :( Thanks... > Only used by shmfs nowadays, yes; it means go away for now, > don't keep on spamming me with this, but try it again later on. > > Though I didn't invent it, it's very much my fault that it > still exists: I've had a patch to remove it (setting PageActive > instead, ending that horrid "but in this case, return with the > page still locked") for about a year, but still hadn't got around > to verifying that it really does what's intended, before the more > interesting split-lru changes reached -mm, and I thought it polite > to hold off for now (though in fact there's almost no conflict). > I'll get there... No big deal. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
