[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Linux 2.4.10-pre11

    On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

    > On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 05:44:18AM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote:
    > > Bumping ->i_count on inode is _not_ an option - think what it does if
    > > you umount the first fs.
    > what it does? Unless I'm missing something the fs never cares and never
    > sees the bd_inode. the fs just does a bdget and then it works only on
    > the bdev. What should I run to get the oops exactly?

    It sees an active inode for superblock we are destroying. _Not_ a good
    thing, for very obvious reasons. There is a reason for "Self-destruct in
    5 seconds" printk...

    > If we need to avoid the bumping of i_count and to allocate something
    > dynamically that will be the bd_mapping address space, we don't need a
    > new fake_inode there too, we just need to share the new physical
    > pagecahce address space. Such physical i_mapping address space is the

    What are you going to use as mapping->host for it?

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.020 / U:48.668 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site