Re: [partial fix?] Re: Badblocks and no free pages...

Dr. Werner Fink (werner@suse.de)
Mon, 5 May 1997 16:11:24 +0200


> Does the following patch help a bit in those scenarios?
> (it looks as if those two lines were supposed to be there by design --
> they perfectly match the existing comment above them :-)
>
> Gadi
>
> --- linux/fs/buffer.c~ Mon May 5 14:55:14 1997
> +++ linux/fs/buffer.c Mon May 5 14:55:14 1997
> @@ -676,6 +676,8 @@
> * now so as to ensure that there are still clean buffers available
> * for user processes to use (and dirty).
> */
> + while(nr_buffers_type[BUF_DIRTY] > nr_buffers * bdf_prm.b_un.nfract/100)
> + wakeup_bdflush(1);
>
> /* We are going to try to locate this much memory. */
> needed = bdf_prm.b_un.nrefill * size;
>

What's about the folowing lines upto line 754 (goto repeat;)? It look's like
the comment points to this code. In line 751/752 there is the needed
wakeup_bdflush(1) ... isn't it?

Werner