On Thu 05-10-17 13:39:23, Trond Myklebust wrote: > Hi Jan, > > On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 10:36 +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm doing some work in page cache handling and I have noticed that > > NFS is > > the only user of mapping->a_ops->freepage callback. From a quick look > > I > > don't see why isn't NFS using ->releasepage / ->invalidatepage > > callback as > > all other filesystems do? I agree you would have to set PagePrivate > > bit for > > those to get called for the directory mapping however that would seem > > like > > a cleaner thing to do anyway - in fact you do have private data in > > the > > page. Just they are not pointed to by page->private but instead are > > stored > > as page data... Am I missing something? > > > > Honza > > I'm not understanding your point. delete_from_page_cache() doesn't call > releasepage AFAICS. No, but before getting to delete_from_page_cache() the filesystem is guaranteed to get either ->invalidatepage or ->releasepage callback called (if it defines them). And at that point the page is already locked and on its way to be destroyed. So my point was you could use these callbacks instead to achieve the same... If you are afraid of races, I don't think those can happen for NFS. Page can be destroyed either because of truncate - at that point there's no risk of anyone else looking at that page for directories (i_rwsem) - or because of page reclaim - at which point we are guaranteed nobody else holds a reference to the page and new reference cannot be acquired. Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
