In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Albrecht writes:
> On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 15:04 +, David Howells wrote:
> > Paul Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Does your test set include readahead-list? I can't get it to work with a
> > > union mounted filesystem without segfault'ing and
Paul Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Without ... what's the difference? I asked a specific question about the
> test set that was used to validate unionfs and your fix.
I was just checking it wasn't something my patch introduced.
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 15:04 +, David Howells wrote:
> Paul Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Does your test set include readahead-list? I can't get it to work with a
> > union mounted filesystem without segfault'ing and kernel oops'ing.
>
> Is that with or without this patch?
Paul Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does your test set include readahead-list? I can't get it to work with a
> union mounted filesystem without segfault'ing and kernel oops'ing.
Is that with or without this patch?
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 01:44 -0500, Erez Zadok wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Howells writes:
> > From: David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Stop the UnionFS filesystem from using iget() and read_inode(). Replace
> > unionfs_read_inode() with unionfs_iget(), and call that
Paul Albrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Without ... what's the difference? I asked a specific question about the
test set that was used to validate unionfs and your fix.
I was just checking it wasn't something my patch introduced.
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Paul Albrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does your test set include readahead-list? I can't get it to work with a
union mounted filesystem without segfault'ing and kernel oops'ing.
Is that with or without this patch?
David
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel
On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 15:04 +, David Howells wrote:
Paul Albrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does your test set include readahead-list? I can't get it to work with a
union mounted filesystem without segfault'ing and kernel oops'ing.
Is that with or without this patch?
Without ...
On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 01:44 -0500, Erez Zadok wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Howells writes:
From: David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stop the UnionFS filesystem from using iget() and read_inode(). Replace
unionfs_read_inode() with unionfs_iget(), and call that instead of
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Paul Albrecht writes:
On Wed, 2007-11-07 at 15:04 +, David Howells wrote:
Paul Albrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does your test set include readahead-list? I can't get it to work with a
union mounted filesystem without segfault'ing and kernel oops'ing.
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Howells writes:
> From: David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Stop the UnionFS filesystem from using iget() and read_inode(). Replace
> unionfs_read_inode() with unionfs_iget(), and call that instead of iget().
> unionfs_iget() then uses iget_locked()
From: David Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stop the UnionFS filesystem from using iget() and read_inode(). Replace
unionfs_read_inode() with unionfs_iget(), and call that instead of iget().
unionfs_iget() then uses iget_locked() directly and returns a proper error code
instead of an inode in the
From: David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stop the UnionFS filesystem from using iget() and read_inode(). Replace
unionfs_read_inode() with unionfs_iget(), and call that instead of iget().
unionfs_iget() then uses iget_locked() directly and returns a proper error code
instead of an inode in the
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Howells writes:
From: David Howells [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stop the UnionFS filesystem from using iget() and read_inode(). Replace
unionfs_read_inode() with unionfs_iget(), and call that instead of iget().
unionfs_iget() then uses iget_locked() directly and
14 matches
Mail list logo