+ page = __grab_cache_page(mapping, index);
btw, __grab_cache_page should probably get a more descriptive and
non-__-prefixed name now that it's used all over the place.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-fsdevel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:46:47AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+ page = __grab_cache_page(mapping, index);
btw, __grab_cache_page should probably get a more descriptive and
non-__-prefixed name now that it's used all over the place.
Agreed. Suggestions? ;)
-
To unsubscribe from this
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 01:05:49PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:46:47AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+ page = __grab_cache_page(mapping, index);
btw, __grab_cache_page should probably get a more descriptive and
non-__-prefixed name now that it's used all over
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 12:11:19PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 01:05:49PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:46:47AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+ page = __grab_cache_page(mapping, index);
btw, __grab_cache_page should probably
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 01:16:53PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
find_or_create_cache_page given that's it's like find_or_create_page +
add_to_page_cache?
find_or_create_page adds to page cache as well, though :P
All those random little slightly different allocators scattered over
filemap.c
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 12:18:11PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 01:16:53PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
I was going to try doing that after this patchset. Or do you think it
would be better to get the __grab_cache_page name right in the
first place?
If you plan to
On Tuesday April 24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 12:11:19PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 01:05:49PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:46:47AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
+ page = __grab_cache_page(mapping,
Also clean up various little things.
I've got rid of the comment from akpm, because now that make_page_uptodate
is only called from 2 places, it is pretty easy to see that the buffers
are in an uptodate state at the time of the call. Actually, it was OK before
my patch as well, because the memset
