Re: [Patch] deadlock on write in tmpfs

[Christoph Rohland <cr@sap.com>]

Hi Stephen,

On Tue, 1 May 2001, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> If the locking is for a completely different reason, then a
> different semaphore is quite appropriate.  In this case you're
> trying to lock the shm internal info structures, which is quite
> different from the sort of inode locking which the VFS tries to do
> itself, so the new semaphore appears quite clean --- and definitely
> needed.

It's not the addition to the inode semaphore I do care about, but the
addition to the spin lock which protects also the shmem internals. But
you are probably right: It only protects the onthefly pages between
page cache and swap cache.

Greetings
		Christoph


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/