On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 12:09:41AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Sul, 2004-01-11 at 23:33, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > For users of a kernel thread it helps. But what affects storage > > also make affect anything else that has a filesystem running > > over it. Plus it forces us to keep the storage thread model, which > > might be a solution that needs to be revisited. > > Its a larger hammer, for 2.6 I agree that moving the right code to > GFP_NOIO is far better a solution. For 2.4 I just want it working with > minimal risk of screwups.
Well, I have no objection to adding that to 2.4 -- either push to Marcelo
yourself or send it to Greg K-H for inclusion in his 2.4 tree and eventual
push upstream.
But we do need to do some sort of 2.6 audit for this sort of thing.
Matt
--
Matthew Dharm Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver
G: Baaap booop BAHHHP.
Mir: 9600 Baud?
Mik: No, no! 9600 goes baap booop, not booop bahhhp!
-- Greg, Miranda and Mike
User Friendly, 12/31/1998
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
