Re: [PATCH 09/28] FS-Cache: Release page->private after failed readahead [try #2]

On Tuesday 18 December 2007 09:42, David Howells wrote: > Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is pretty nasty. > > Why? If the fs doesn't set PG_private or PG_fscache on any pages before > calling read_cache_pages(), there's no difference. It is conceptually wrong. > Furthermore, th

Re: [PATCH 09/28] FS-Cache: Release page->private after failed readahead [try #2]

Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is pretty nasty. Why? If the fs doesn't set PG_private or PG_fscache on any pages before calling read_cache_pages(), there's no difference. Furthermore, the differences only crop up in the error handling paths. > I would suggest either to have the

Re: [PATCH 09/28] FS-Cache: Release page->private after failed readahead [try #2]

On Thursday 06 December 2007 06:39, David Howells wrote: > The attached patch causes read_cache_pages() to release page-private data > on a page for which add_to_page_cache() fails or the filler function fails. > This permits pages with caching references associated with them to be > cleaned up. >

[PATCH 09/28] FS-Cache: Release page->private after failed readahead [try #2]

The attached patch causes read_cache_pages() to release page-private data on a page for which add_to_page_cache() fails or the filler function fails. This permits pages with caching references associated with them to be cleaned up. The invalidatepage() address space op is called (indirectly) to do