Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=112368417412580&w=2 > > Oh. You are talking about CacheFS? That hasn't been declared "ready to > merge" yet.
I can probably put out FS-Cache now, and the patches for kAFS and NFS to use it. CacheFS is taking a little longer than expected because I'm having to be so careful about ENOMEM handling. > That said, is it really safe to use any flags other than > PG_lock/PG_writeback there, David? If I use PG_locked, that hurts performance horribly as readpage() can't then unlock the page until the page has been read from the network _and_ has been written to the cache, two operations which _must_ of necessity be sequential. I can't use PG_writeback to cover the write to the cache as that has indicates write completion to the network. Writes to the cache and the network may run in parallel, and so you need two flags to keep track of the completion state of both. > I can't see that you want to allow other tasks to modify or free the page > while you are writing it to the local cache. I don't. Hence the use of a combination of the PG_fs_misc bit and the page_mkwrite() VMA op. The page release address space op also waits for the PG_fs_misc bit. David - 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/
