From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail138.messagelabs.com (mail138.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275F36B003D for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 04:20:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [patch][rfc] mm: hold page lock over page_mkwrite From: Peter Zijlstra In-Reply-To: <20090225093629.GD22785@wotan.suse.de> References: <20090225093629.GD22785@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:20:18 +0100 Message-Id: <1235640018.4645.4692.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Memory Management List List-ID: On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 10:36 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote: > + if (!page_mkwrite) > + wait_on_page_locked(dirty_page); > set_page_dirty_balance(dirty_page, page_mkwrite); > put_page(dirty_page); > + if (page_mkwrite) { > + unlock_page(old_page); > + page_cache_release(old_page); > + } We're calling into the whole balance_dirty_pages() writeout path with a page locked.. is that sensible? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org