From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:25:34 -0800 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [RFC 0/8] Cpuset aware writeback Message-Id: <20070117172534.fbe92a88.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20070116054743.15358.77287.sendpatchset@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> <20070116135325.3441f62b.akpm@osdl.org> <20070116154054.e655f75c.akpm@osdl.org> <20070116170734.947264f2.akpm@osdl.org> <20070116183406.ed777440.akpm@osdl.org> <20070116200506.d19eacf5.akpm@osdl.org> <20070116230034.b8cb4263.akpm@osdl.org> <20070117141046.cd19c9e8.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Christoph Lameter Cc: menage@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, linux-mm@kvack.org, ak@suse.de, pj@sgi.com, dgc@sgi.com List-ID: > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:10:25 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > The inode lock is not taken when the page is dirtied. > > > > The inode_lock is taken when the address_space's first page is dirtied. It is > > also taken when the address_space's last dirty page is cleaned. So the place > > where the inode is added to and removed from sb->s_dirty is, I think, exactly > > the place where we want to attach and detach address_space.dirty_page_nodemask. > > The problem there is that we do a GFP_ATOMIC allocation (no allocation > context) that may fail when the first page is dirtied. We must therefore > be able to subsequently allocate the nodemask_t in set_page_dirty(). > Otherwise the first failure will mean that there will never be a dirty > map for the inode/mapping. True. But it's pretty simple to change __mark_inode_dirty() to fix this. -- 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