On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> OK, I think I have it fixed, and would _really_ appreciate it if you would
> test/confirm. (would very much like to see this problem finally die..
> and stay dead long enough for someone to actually use the device :)
Hi Mike,
I tested your patch and it works ok (no initrd, just plain ramdisk) but I
have questions/comments:
1. I believe there is no need to check return of rbh = getblk() as
getblk() never returns NULL. This is why things like bread()/breada()
never check the return of getblk().
2. why do we mark_buffer_protected(rbh)? I thought the point was to make
bdflush to skip them when flushing buffers but looking at bdflush()
sources it skips !buffer_dirty() and buffer_locked() buffers and nothing
(except obviously show_buffers()) seems to ask if(buffer_protected(bh))
question.
Hence my question - does mark_buffer_protected(bh) serve any purpose?
Regards
------
Tigran A. Aivazian | http://www.sco.com
Escalations Research Group | tel: +44-(0)1923-813796
Santa Cruz Operation Ltd | http://www.ocston.org/~tigran
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:13 EST