On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:10:50 -0500
> > Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > --- a/include/linux/fs.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/fs.h
> > > @@ -602,6 +602,7 @@ struct address_space_operations {
> > > sector_t (*bmap)(struct address_space *, sector_t);
> > > void (*invalidatepage) (struct page *, unsigned long);
> > > int (*releasepage) (struct page *, gfp_t);
> > > + void (*freepage)(struct page *);
> > > ssize_t (*direct_IO)(int, struct kiocb *, const struct iovec *iov,
> > > loff_t offset, unsigned long nr_segs);
> > > int (*get_xip_mem)(struct address_space *, pgoff_t, int,
> >
> > It would be good to think about and then clearly spell out exactly what
> > state the page is in here. It is locked, and I assume clean and not
> > under writeback. What about its refcount, freezedness status and
> > eligibility for lookups?
> >
> > And as Hugh pointed out, some callees might needs the address_space*
> > although we can perhaps defer that until such a callee turns up.
> > If/when that happens we might have a problem though: if this locked
> > page is no longer attached to the address_space then what now pins the
> > address_space, protecting it from inode reclaim?
>
> That's an excellent point and trumps mine: it would be actively wrong
> to provide the struct address_space *mapping arg I was asking for.
> (Bet someone then tries stashing it away via page->private though.)
Hmm, thinking further along the same lines: can we even guarantee that
the filesystem module is still loaded at that point? i.e. might
mapping->freepage now be pointing off into the garbage heap?
Hugh
--
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
