Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Apr 1999 21:58:28 +0200 (CEST) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: bforget and protected buffers |
| |
On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Chuck Lever wrote:
>latent bug there, and that for consistency and completeness, bforget() >probably ought to use buffer_busy.
The main point of bforget (the thing that if I remeber well was doing also before we start playing with it) is to avoid to sync data that make no sense anymore. So we can't use buffer_busy that would check also for the dirty and protected bit (yes my patch was really a mistake but I understood only now how the ramdisk works and why it's safe (and nice) to forget a protected/ramdisk buffer). Before to see the light ;) I couldn't convince myself that forgetting a protected buffer was obviosly right...
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/
| |