Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 20 Sep 2001 01:40:17 +0200 | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.10-pre11 |
| |
On Wed, Sep 19, 2001 at 07:30:55PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > "swapon() messing with block_size when accidentially called for mounted
swap should never change softblocksize etc.. the concept of softblocksize will die as soon as we make the buffercache - physically address space backed.
> Umm... Not doing unnecessary work? Semantics of releasing a block device > depends on the kind of use. BTW, I'm less than sure that fsync_dev() is > the right thing for file access now that you've got that in pagecache - > __block_fsync() seems to be more correct thing to do.
Not really, blkdev isn't a filesystem. It will never have a superblock and its own inodes and we also need to filemap_fdatasync/wait the physical address space.
> /me goes to get some sleep.
night.
Andrea - 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/
|  |