On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> The problem lies with writes that haven't yet been msync()ed (and
> hence do not have writebacks). For shared mappings, one should perhaps
> schedule an automatic msync() of the dirty pages (???). For private
> mappings, perhaps the best thing would be to defer the read?
Note that NONE of this is going to happen for 2.4.x.
We've never _ever_ done this before, there's no point in even suggesting
that this is suddenly a "critical" bug. It's not.
I want to know what the suggestion for 2.4.x is. Right now that's the "if
the count is elevated, we don't invalidate".
Quite frankly, I don't see any other option. Doing the !Uptodate version
will lose local data as it stands now - in fact right now you'd lose data
that way even if you are the only client accessing the file, which is
obviously complete crap and _completely_ unacceptable.
I'm open to suggestions, but I haven't heard anything realistic.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 21:00:16 EST