lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:51    [W:0.039 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site