On Monday May 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Ho hum, I give up.
Thankyou :-) I found our debate very valuable - it helped me clarify
my understanding of some areas of linux filesystem semantics (and as I
am trying to write a filesystem in my 'spare time', that will turn out
to be very useful).
Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > I have a patch which did that,
> > > but decided that the possibility of kmalloc failure at awkward times
> > > would make that not suitable.
> >
> > submit_bh() can and will allocate memory, although most decent device
> > drivers should be
(replying to bits of several emails)
On Friday May 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > However some IO requests cannot complete until the filesystem I/O
> > completes, so we need to be sure that the filesystem I/O won't block
> > waiting for memory, or fail w
Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Saturday May 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >
> > > > The loss of pagecache coherency seems sad. I assume there's never a
> > > > requirement for userspace to read this fil
On Saturday May 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > > The loss of pagecache coherency seems sad. I assume there's never a
> > > requirement for userspace to read this file.
> >
> > Actually, there is. mdadm reads the bitmap
Paul Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > The loss of pagecache coherency seems sad. I assume there's never a
> > requirement for userspace to read this file.
>
> Actually, there is. mdadm reads the bitmap file, so that would be
> broken. Also, it's just useful for
Andrew Morton wrote:
The loss of pagecache coherency seems sad. I assume there's never a
requirement for userspace to read this file.
Actually, there is. mdadm reads the bitmap file, so that would be
broken. Also, it's just useful for a user to be able to read the bitmap
(od -x, or similar)
Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Friday May 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > If md is asked to store a bitmap in a file, it tries to hold onto the
> > > page cache pages for that file, manipulate them directly, and call a
> > > cocktail o
On Friday May 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > If md is asked to store a bitmap in a file, it tries to hold onto the
> > page cache pages for that file, manipulate them directly, and call a
> > cocktail of operations to write the file out. I don't believe
NeilBrown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> If md is asked to store a bitmap in a file, it tries to hold onto the
> page cache pages for that file, manipulate them directly, and call a
> cocktail of operations to write the file out. I don't believe this is
> a supportable approach.
erk. I think it'
If md is asked to store a bitmap in a file, it tries to hold onto the
page cache pages for that file, manipulate them directly, and call a
cocktail of operations to write the file out. I don't believe this is
a supportable approach.
This patch changes the approach to use the same approach as swa
11 matches
Mail list logo
