On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Ryan Finnie wrote:
> On 10/11/07, Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > shit. That's a nasty bug. Really userspace should be testing for -1, but
> > the msync() library function should only ever return 0 or -1.
> >
> > Does this fix it?
> >
> > --- a/mm/page-writeback.c~a
> > +++ a/mm/page-writeback.c
> > @@ -850,8 +850,10 @@ retry:
> >
> > ret = (*writepage)(page, wbc, data);
> >
> > - if (unlikely(ret == AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE))
> > + if (unlikely(ret == AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE)) {
> > unlock_page(page);
> > + ret = 0;
> > + }
> > if (ret || (--(wbc->nr_to_write) <= 0))
> > done = 1;
> > if (wbc->nonblocking && bdi_write_congested(bdi)) {
> > _
> >
>
> Pekka Enberg replied with an identical patch a few days ago, but for
> some reason the same condition flows up to msync as -1 EIO instead of
> AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE with that patch applied. The last part of the
> thread is below. Thanks.
Each time I sit down to follow what's going on with writepage and
unionfs and msync, I get distracted: I really haven't researched
this properly.
But I keep suspecting that the answer might be the patch below (which
rather follows what drivers/block/rd.c is doing). I'm especially
worried that, rather than just AOP_WRITEPAGE_ACTIVATE being returned
to userspace, bad enough in itself, you might be liable to hit that
BUG_ON(page_mapped(page)). shmem_writepage does not expect to be
called by anyone outside mm/vmscan.c, but unionfs can now get to it?
Please let us know if this patch does fix it:
then I'll try harder to work out what goes on.
Thanks,
Hugh
--- 2.6.23/mm/shmem.c 2007-10-09 21:31:38.000000000 +0100
+++ linux/mm/shmem.c 2007-10-12 01:25:46.000000000 +0100
@@ -916,6 +916,11 @@ static int shmem_writepage(struct page *
struct inode *inode;
BUG_ON(!PageLocked(page));
+ if (!wbc->for_reclaim) {
+ set_page_dirty(page);
+ unlock_page(page);
+ return 0;
+ }
BUG_ON(page_mapped(page));
mapping = page->mapping;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
