lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v2] mm, netfs: Provide a means of invalidation without using launder_folio
Date
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:

> > + /* Prevent new folios from being added to the inode. */
> > + filemap_invalidate_lock(mapping);
>
> I'm kind of surprised that the callers wouldn't want to hold that lock
> over a call to this function. I guess you're working on the callers,
> so you'd know better than I would, but I would have used lockdep to
> assert that invalidate_lock was held.

I'm not sure. None of the places that look like they'd be calling this
currently take that lock (though possibly they should).

Also, should I provide it with explicit range, I wonder?

> > + if (unlikely(!RB_EMPTY_ROOT(&mapping->i_mmap.rb_root)))
> > + unmap_mapping_pages(mapping, 0, ULONG_MAX, false);
>
> Is this optimisation worth it?

Perhaps not.

David


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:12    [W:1.060 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site