Timur Tabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> > Reading through the tree, I see that some callers of get_user_pages()
> > release the pages that they got via put_page(), and some callers use
> > page_cache_release(). Of course <linux/pagemap.h> has
> >
> > #define page_cache_release(page) put_page(page)
> >
> > so this is really not much of a difference, but I'd like to know which
> > is considered better style. Any opinions?
I guess we should only use page_cache_release() if the page is known to be
pagecache. In the case of get_user_pages() the page could of course be
anonymous in which case put_page is probably more appropriate. It's all a
bit of a mess and if we ever do end up having PAGE_CACHE_SIZE > PAGE_SIZE,
someone will have some work to do.
I suppose put_page() would be better for now.
> I've defined this function. I'm not sure if it really works, but it
> looks good.
>
> #include <linux/pagemap.h>
>
> void put_user_pages(int len, struct page **pages)
> {
> int i;
>
> for (i=0; i<len; i++) {
> if (!PageReserved(pages[i])) {
> SetPageDirty(pages[i]);
> }
> page_cache_release(pages[i]);
> }
> }
no... You should only dirty the page if it was modified, and then use
set_page_dirty() or set_page_dirty_lock().
See dio_bio_complete() for an example.
-
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/
