On 4 Feb 2019, at 14:03, Benjamin Coddington wrote: > On 4 Feb 2019, at 13:32, Trond Myklebust wrote: > >> On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 13:13 -0500, Benjamin Coddington wrote: >>> If nfs_page_async_flush() removes the page from the mapping, then we >>> can't >>> use page_file_mapping() on it as nfs_updatepate() is wont to do when >>> receiving an error. Instead, simplify nfs_zap_mapping() to take the >>> inode. >>> >> >> Won't this break NFS swap? > > I guess it may, but then I wonder: is that a thing that anyone does? It > sounds like a terrible idea.. > > I'm curious enough though, and doing some research on it. There's enough to commits in the tree fixing problem or supporting swap on NFS, so I suppose I've just missed all that. .. back to the code to find another way. Ben
