Re: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error atfs/buffer.c:431"
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Sun Nov 02 2003 - 04:39:16 EST
Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 11:33:54PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > aargh. I thought Debian's 2.6 kernels were unmodified. Are they carrying
> > any other changes?
> Yes we are. You can find the changes in
Where are the separated patches?
That's 170k of stuff you're sitting on. Is there any plan to get it synced
> > That _should_ work. The pagecache pages should be in such a state that all
> > buffers are freeable and yes, we can leave the pagecache there. But this
> > could cause problems if the device was repartitioned in between, or if it
> > was hotswapped. I don't think we shoot down pagecache anywhere else for
> > this.
> Yes, however it should be safe to stop set_blocksize from calling
> truncate_inode_pages, right?
No, because _something_ has to rub out the wrong-sized buffer_heads. One
could add some new function which walks the pagecache and removes the
buffer_heads from the pages, leaving the pages there. There doesn't seem a
lot of point in it though?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/