Re: [PATCH] rmap 18 i_mmap_nonlinear

[William Lee Irwin III]

On Wed, Apr 28, 2004 at 07:11:18PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> ... do we still need both i_mmap and i_mmap_shared?
> Is there a place left where we're using both trees in
> a different way, or are we just walking both trees
> anyway in all places where they're referenced ?

I believe the flush_dcache_page() implementations touching
->i_mmap_shared care about this distinction.


-- wli
-
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/