Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:41:40 -0300 (BRT) | From | Marcelo Tosatti <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.19-pre3 |
| |
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > Jens, > > Please try again because that is not the real problem. > All you have shown is that we disagree on the method of page walking > between BLOCK v/s IOCTL. This is very minor and I agreed that it is > reasonable to map the IOCTL buffer in to BH or BIO so this is a net zero > of negative point. > > How about attempting to describe the differences between the atomic and > what is violated by who and where.
Andre,
Jens just described what can be violated:
"First of all, rq->buffer cannot be indexed for the entire nr_sectors range -- it's per definition only the first segment in the request, and can as such only be indexed within the first current_nr_sectors number of sectors. The above can be grossly out of range..."
Can you tell me why his is wrong ?
BTW, I just checked 2.5 and it seems to be the similar (on the non-BIO case).
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |