linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Staubach <staubach@redhat.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hugh@veritas.com,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update ctime and mtime for mmaped write
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:11:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45DDF8F3.2020304@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HKIUk-0006Sl-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>

Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>>>>>> +int set_page_dirty_mapping(struct page *page);
>>>>>>>   
>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>           
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>> This aspect of the design seems intrusive to me.  I didn't see a strong
>>>>>> reason to introduce new versions of many of the routines just to handle
>>>>>> these semantics.  What motivated this part of your design?  Why the new
>>>>>> _mapping versions of routines?
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Because there's no way to know inside the set_page_dirty() functions
>>>>> if the dirtying comes from a memory mapping or from a modification
>>>>> through a normal write().  And they have different semantics, for
>>>>> write() the modification times are updated immediately.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Perhaps I didn't understand what page_mapped() does, but it does seem to
>>>> have the right semantics as far as I could see.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> The problems will start, when you have a file that is both mapped and
>>> modified with write().  Then the dirying from the write() will set the
>>> flag, and that will have undesirable consequences.
>>>       
>> I don't think that I quite follow the logic.  The dirtying from write()
>> will set the flag, but then the mtime will get updated and the flag will
>> be cleared by the hook in file_update_time().  Right?
>>     
>
> Take this example:
>
>     fd = open()
>     addr = mmap(.., fd)
>     write(fd, ...)
>     close(fd)
>     sleep(100)
>     msync(addr,...)
>     munmap(addr)
>
> The file times will be updated in write(), but with your patch, the
> bit in the mapping will also be set.
>
> Then in msync() the file times will be updated again, which is wrong,
> since the memory was _not_ modified through the mapping.

This is correct.  I have updated my proposed patch to include the clearing
of AS_MCTIME in the routine which updates the mtime field.  I haven't
reposted it yet until I complete testing of the new resulting system.  I
anticipate doing this later today.

    Thanx..

       ps

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-22 20:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-21 17:51 Miklos Szeredi, Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-21 18:07 ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-21 18:23   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-21 18:54     ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-21 19:07       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 17:36         ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-22 18:16           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 20:11             ` Peter Staubach [this message]
2007-02-22 20:43               ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 20:50                 ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-21 18:12 ` Trond Myklebust
2007-02-21 18:28   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-21 18:36     ` Trond Myklebust
2007-02-21 18:50       ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-21 18:50       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22  4:26 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-22  7:49   ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 17:39     ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-22 18:08       ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 20:14         ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-22 20:48           ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 20:55             ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-22 21:04             ` Trond Myklebust
2007-02-22 21:28               ` Miklos Szeredi
2007-02-22 21:52                 ` Peter Staubach
2007-02-22 22:08                   ` Miklos Szeredi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=45DDF8F3.2020304@redhat.com \
    --to=staubach@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=hugh@veritas.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox