Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] VM: Fix the gfp_mask in invalidate_complete_page2 | From | Trond Myklebust <> | Date | Tue, 10 Oct 2006 09:32:10 -0400 |
| |
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 09:22 -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: > > Trond Myklebust wrote: > > Why? If, as in the case of an NFS directory, there are no dirty pages > > then the two are supposed to be 100% equivalent. > Well as you know, lately we've had problems with > invalidate_inode_pages2() failing to invalidate pages (regardless of > their state). So I was thinking truncate_inode_pages() might be > better for directories since there seem to be more a guarantee that > the pages will be gone with truncate_inode_pages() than > invalidate_inode_pages2() (due to the fact there will not be any > dirty pages).
truncate_inode_pages and invalidate_inode_pages2 are supposed to result in exactly the same behaviour on NFS directories. If they don't then that would be a bug.
Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |