Messages in this thread | | | From | "Khimenko Victor" <> | Date | Sun, 11 Jul 1999 08:56:46 +0400 (MSD) | Subject | Re: update_vm_cache? |
| |
In <19990710200915.A1741@pinwheel.bctel.ca> tmg@bc.sympatico.ca (tmg@bc.sympatico.ca) wrote: > Khimenko Victor wrote:
>> FAT is deliberately broken in 2.3.7 and STILL not fixed (looks like >> Linus does not worried much, though).
> Do you know why it was broken?
Huh. I'm wonder how you was able to miss all this, but anyway: -- cut -- Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 20:00:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> To: Pete Clements <clem@clem.digital.net> cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> Subject: Re: pre-2.3.7-1 fails compile Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.95.990613195550.10845F-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
I'd like to point out that the current pre-2.3.7 series is fairly experimental. As amply demonstrated by the filename (the "dangerous" part in the filename hopefully made some people go "Hmm..").
We're working on re-architecting (or rather, cleaning up so that it works like it really was supposed to) the page cache writing, and as a result a number of filesystems are probably going to be broken for a while unless we get people jumping in to help.
Right now 2.3.7-1 (aka "dangerous") is not stable even with ext2, in that swapping doesn't work. Ingo just sent me patches to fix that, and I'm hoping to remove the "dangerous" part from 2.3.7-2, but even then a number of filesystems will be broken.
We _may_ end up just re-introducing the "update_vm_cache()" code for filesystems that really don't need the added performance, but it would actually be preferable if people really wanted to make them perform well with the new direct write-through cache code.
Linus
-- cut -- Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 19:27:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> To: Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> cc: Craig Anderson <csa@transmeta.com>, Daniel Quinlan <quinlan@transmeta.com> Subject: Linux-2.3.7.. Let's be careful out there.. Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9906201916560.657-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
The new and much improved fully page-cache based filesystem code is now apparently stable, and works wonderfully well performancewise. We fixed all known issues with the IO subsystem: it scales well in SMP, and it avoids unnecessary copies and unnecessary temporary buffers for write-out. The shared mapping code in particular is much cleaner and also a _lot_ faster.
In short, it's perfect. And we want as many people as possible out there testing out the new cool code, and bask in the success stories..
HOWEVER. _Just_ in case something goes wrong [ extremely unlikely of course. Sure. Sue me ], we want to indeminfy ourselves. There just might be a bug hiding there somewhere, and it might eat your filesystem while laughing in glee over you being naive and testing new code. So you have been warned.
In particular, there's some indication that it might have problems on sparc still (and/or other architectures), possibly due to the ext2fs byte order cleanups that have also been done in order to reach the afore-mentioned state of perfection.
I'd be especially interested in people running databases on top of Linux: Solid server in particular is very fsync-happy, and that's one of the operations that have been speeded up by orders of magnitude.
Linus
-- cut --
So do not expect working FAT any time soon... And do not expect some replace for update_vm_cache as well: as Linus said it WILL be eventually implemented for 2.4 if some filesystems will be still broked then but it'll not be done for few weeks (or may be months)... Since most FS guru are not using FAT we, mere mortals, are forced to live without FAT support for next few weeks when using latest versions of 2.3.x :-/
- 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/
| |