Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:12 -0400, Peter Staubach wrote:
Signed-off-by: Peter Staubach <staubach@xxxxxxxxxx>
Please could you send such patches as inline, rather than as
attachments. It makes it harder to comment on the patch contents...
I will investigate how to do this.
+static int nfs_want_read_modify_write(struct file *file, struct page *page,
+ loff_t pos, unsigned len)
+{
+ unsigned int pglen = nfs_page_length(page);
+ unsigned int offset = pos & (PAGE_CACHE_SIZE - 1);
+ unsigned int end = offset + len;
+
+ if ((file->f_mode & FMODE_READ) && /* open for read? */
+ !PageUptodate(page) && /* Uptodate? */
+ !PageDirty(page) && /* Dirty already? */
+ !PagePrivate(page) && /* i/o request already? */
I don't think you need the PageDirty() test. These days we should be
guaranteed to always have PagePrivate() set whenever PageDirty() is
(although the converse is not true). Anything else would be a bug...
Okie doke. It seemed to me that this should be true, but it was
safer to leave both tests.
I will remove that PageDirty test, retest, and then send another
version of the patch. I will be out next week, so it will take a
couple of weeks.
Thanx...
ps
+ pglen && /* valid bytes of file? */
+ (end < pglen || offset)) /* replace all valid bytes? */
+ return 1;
+ return 0;
+}
+
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
