Re: Official ;) fix for the SPECIAL bug

Tigran Aivazian (tigran@sco.COM)
Mon, 13 Dec 1999 11:50:23 +0000 (GMT)

just for my education - is the value 4 better than 3 for some specific
reasons (like 3 is a reserved block request command?) or just because it
was already in your patch :)

On Mon, 13 Dec 1999, Alan Cox wrote:

> > --- fs.h.0 Mon Dec 13 09:27:44 1999
> > +++ fs.h Mon Dec 13 09:28:10 1999
>
> The official one that I missed when feeding Linus is
>
>
> diff -u --new-file --recursive --exclude-from ../exclude linux.32p2/include/linux/fs.h linux.ac/include/linux/fs.h
> --- linux.32p2/include/linux/fs.h Sun Dec 12 23:42:40 1999
> +++ linux.ac/include/linux/fs.h Sun Dec 12 02:30:42 1999
> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@
> #define READ 0
> #define WRITE 1
> #define READA 2 /* read-ahead - don't block if no resources */
> +#define SPECIAL 4 /* For non-blockdevice requests in request queue */
>
> #define WRITERAW 5 /* raw write - don't play with buffer lists */
>
>

-
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/