The `truncated' page in block_write_full_page()/nobh_writepage() may
stick for a long time. For example, ext2_rmdir() will set i_size to
0, and then the dir inode and its pages may hang around because of
being referenced by some process.
To produce this situation:
In terminal 1:
Hi Erez,
Aside from the occasional unionfs: new lower inode mtime messages
on directories (which I've got into the habit of ignoring now), the
only problem I'm still suffering with unionfs over tmpfs (not tested
any other fs's below it recently) is oops in unionfs_copy_attr_times.
I believe I'm
Chris Mason wrote:
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Jan Kara wrote:
On Thu 31-01-08 11:56:01, Chris Mason wrote:
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Al Boldi wrote:
The big difference between ordered and writeback is that once the
slowdown starts, ordered goes into ~100% iowait, whereas
Hi.
The patch enhanced the ESTALE error handling for NFS mounted
file systems. It expands the number of places that the NFS
client checks for ESTALE returns from the server.
It also enhances the ESTALE handling for directories by
occasionally retrying revalidation to check to see whether the
Hi.
This is a patch to enhance ESTALE error handling during the
lookup process. The error, ESTALE, can occur when out of data
dentries, stored in the dcache, is used to translate a pathname
component to a dentry. When this occurs, the dentry which
contains the pointer to the inode which refers
Hi.
This patch adds handling for the error, ESTALE, to the system
calls which take pathnames as arguments. The algorithm used
is to detect that an ESTALE error has occurred during an
operation subsequent to the lookup process and then to unwind
appropriately and then to perform the lookup
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 15:58 -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
Hi.
The patch enhanced the ESTALE error handling for NFS mounted
file systems. It expands the number of places that the NFS
client checks for ESTALE returns from the server.
It also enhances the ESTALE handling for directories by
Hi.
Here is version 2 of a patch set which modifies the system to
enhance the ESTALE error handling for system calls which take
pathnames as arguments.
The error, ESTALE, was originally introduced to handle the
situation where a file handle, which NFS uses to uniquely
identify a file on the
This doesn't apply to -mm, because the ro-mounts stuff touches a lot
of the same places as this patch. You probably need to rebase this on
top of those changes.
This patch adds handling for the error, ESTALE, to the system
calls which take pathnames as arguments. The algorithm used
is to
Trond Myklebust wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 15:58 -0500, Peter Staubach wrote:
Hi.
The patch enhanced the ESTALE error handling for NFS mounted
file systems. It expands the number of places that the NFS
client checks for ESTALE returns from the server.
It also enhances the ESTALE
Miklos Szeredi wrote:
This doesn't apply to -mm, because the ro-mounts stuff touches a lot
of the same places as this patch. You probably need to rebase this on
top of those changes.
This patch adds handling for the error, ESTALE, to the system
calls which take pathnames as arguments. The
This doesn't apply to -mm, because the ro-mounts stuff touches a lot
of the same places as this patch. You probably need to rebase this on
top of those changes.
This patch adds handling for the error, ESTALE, to the system
calls which take pathnames as arguments. The algorithm
Miklos Szeredi wrote:
This doesn't apply to -mm, because the ro-mounts stuff touches a lot
of the same places as this patch. You probably need to rebase this on
top of those changes.
This patch adds handling for the error, ESTALE, to the system
calls which take pathnames as
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hugh Dickins writes:
Hi Erez,
Aside from the occasional unionfs: new lower inode mtime messages
on directories (which I've got into the habit of ignoring now), the
only problem I'm still suffering with unionfs over tmpfs (not tested
any other fs's below it
14 matches
Mail list logo
