| To: | Ferenc Wagner <wferi@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: mmap vs mtime in 2.6.26 and up |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 18 May 2009 07:43:05 -0400 |
| Cc: | Ray Lee <ray-lk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Staubach <staubach@xxxxxxxxxx>, Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20090515165054.GA11439@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:50:54PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 06:40:29PM +0200, Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> > Thanks for the analysis. Unfortunately I don't nearly know enough to
> > work on this issue, but would like to track it as it affects our
> > backup system. So, shouldn't #2645 be reopened again?
>
> Yes, definitively as the current "fix" is incorrected. I'll try to cook
> up a correct version once I get some time.
Doing this correctly in the framework of the current codee is
unfortunately not so easy, as calling ->setattr requires taking i_mutex
which we can't in the pagefaul path.
To fix this properly we need to actually update the timestamps during
msync and co as done by the patches from Miklos:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/28/166
and Peter:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/31/176
----- End forwarded message -----
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 1/7] xfs: split inode data writeback from xfs_sync_inodes_ag, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: EXT vs XFS at 80% filled filesystem, Milind |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: mmap vs mtime in 2.6.26 and up, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | XFS status update for April 2009, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |