Re: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error atfs/buffer.c:431"

[Andrew Morton]

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
> 
> http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/k/kernel-source-2.6.0-test9/

Where are the separated patches?

That's 170k of stuff you're sitting on.  Is there any plan to get it synced
up?

> > 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/