On Wed, 9 May 2001, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>
> In addition to the two changes I proposed to Andrea's new patch, I
> also realized we might want to do a fdatasync() when locking files. If
> we don't, then locking won't be atomic on mmap()...
>
> Here therefore is Andrea's patch with the changes I propose. Opinions?
>
> Cheers,
> Trond
>
> diff -u --recursive --new-file linux-2.4.4-fixes/fs/nfs/file.c
>linux-2.4.4-mmap/fs/nfs/file.c
> --- linux-2.4.4/fs/nfs/file.c Fri Feb 9 20:29:44 2001
> +++ linux-2.4.4-mmap/fs/nfs/file.c Wed May 9 09:18:45 2001
> @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@
> static ssize_t nfs_file_write(struct file *, const char *, size_t, loff_t *);
> static int nfs_file_flush(struct file *);
> static int nfs_fsync(struct file *, struct dentry *dentry, int datasync);
> +static void nfs_file_close_vma(struct vm_area_struct *);
>
> struct file_operations nfs_file_operations = {
> read: nfs_file_read,
> @@ -57,6 +58,11 @@
> setattr: nfs_notify_change,
> };
>
> +static struct vm_operations_struct nfs_file_vm_ops = {
> + nopage: filemap_nopage,
> + close: nfs_file_close_vma,
> +};
> +
> /* Hack for future NFS swap support */
> #ifndef IS_SWAPFILE
> # define IS_SWAPFILE(inode) (0)
> @@ -104,6 +110,20 @@
> return result;
> }
>
> +static void nfs_file_close_vma(struct vm_area_struct * vma)
> +{
> + struct inode * inode;
> +
> + inode = vma->vm_file->f_dentry->d_inode;
> +
> + if (inode->i_state & I_DIRTY_PAGES) {
> + down(&inode->i_sem);
> + filemap_fdatasync(inode->i_mapping);
> + nfs_wb_all(inode);
> + up(&inode->i_sem);
> + }
> +}
> +
Why don't you clean I_DIRTY_PAGES ?
-
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/
