From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:30:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 1/2] mm: dont clear PG_uptodate in invalidate_complete_page2() In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20080625124038.103406301@szeredi.hu> <20080625124121.839734708@szeredi.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Miklos Szeredi Cc: jens.axboe@oracle.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hugh@veritas.com, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au List-ID: On Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > We discussed this yesterday. My conclusion was (which I still think > is true) that it can't be fixed in page_cache_pipe_buf_confirm(), > because due to current practice of not setting PG_error for I/O errors > for read, it is impossible to distinguish between a never-been-uptodate > page and a was-uptodate-before-invalidation page. Umm. The regular read does this quite well. If something isn't up-to-date, it tries a synchronous read. Once. > And it's not just an nfsd issue. Userspace might also expect that if > a zero count is returned, that means it went beyond EOF, and not that > it should retry the splice, maybe it has better luck this time. You're totally ignoring the real issue - user space that uses splice() *knows* that it uses splice(). It's a private mmap(). NFSD, on the other hand, is supposed to act as NFSD. I think that currently it assumes that nobody else modifies the files, which is reasonable, but breaks with FUSE. But do you see? That's a NFSD/FUSE issue, not a splice one! Linus -- 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