[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.4.11-pre2 fs/buffer.c: invalidate: busy buffer
On Oct 03, 2001  04:10 +0000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> In article <>, Shane Wegner <> wrote:
> >I am getting the following out of fs/buffer.c immediately
> >after bootup. The kernel is 2.4.11-pre2 when the message
> >was added.
> >
> >Oct 2 17:35:08 continuum kernel: invalidate: busy buffer
> >Oct 2 17:35:08 continuum last message repeated 7 times
> >
> >I assume this is an error though it doesn't seem to say so.
> Well, it's an error, but it's an error in that LVM invalidates the block
> devices a bit too much, and the message really tells you that the code
> refused to invalidate stuff that must not be invalidated.
> It's harmless, although I hope that the LVM people will become a bit
> less invalidation-happy as a result of the warning (it's always happened
> before, it just hasn't warned about it in earlier kernels).

Given that 2.4.10+ have devices in page cache, is there _any_ reason
why what the kernel sees on a device would be different than what user
space reads from a device? I don't think it was ever an issue between
whole-disk-dev and partition-dev aliasing, since both user-space and
the kernel are accessing the same device.

If not, then we can just change the PV_FLUSH code to not do
invalidate_buffers() on the device for kernels 2.4.10+. There never
was a very strong reason to do it for disk identification.

Cheers, Andreas

CC'd LVM folks to get their input on this.
Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto,
\ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" -- Dogbert

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:0.078 / U:2.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site