Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Jun 1999 17:38:10 +0200 (CEST) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: File Corruption Bug.. continued |
| |
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> interrupt changes
I would remove the interrupt fix from the list.
>with their brain firmly wrapped around the page cache/vfs verify this change >that was made is absolutely safe
It's absolutely safe. read_swap_cache and lookup_swap_cache can't return a not swap cache page. See read_swap_cache_async and lookup_swap_cache(). If the patch made a difference it means that there's a race somewhere (but I really don't think it's the case).
I never had corruption here so my guess it that the corruption isn't related to the kernel proper (or that I fixed the bug by mistake in my 2.2.x VM patches but I don't think so). I had a fast review of the 2.2.7->2.2.9 changes too last week and I noticed nothing of dubious in the kernel proper/memory-management (I didn't looked into the other things though).
I'll did an & between your list with the things that I don't use intensively here, the remaining suspects are: o Quota - which has big 2.2.7->2.2.9 changes. o The small scsi changes (dubious) o TCP changes o IRDA o NFS
BTW, do you have all .config of people who reported fs corruption? An & between all config options would be interesting :).
(2.2.10 has also the forgotten-write fix in threading from Stephen, it looks perfectly ok to me though)
Andrea Arcangeli
- 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/
| |