On 03/01/16(Sun) 23:16, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> I don't understand why the check for reading ahead one block has been
> kept for clustering read when the Dynamic buffer cache got introduced.
>
> Since bread_cluster() replaces cluster_read() I believe this can go
> away.
Any ok?
> Index:
I don't understand why the check for reading ahead one block has been
kept for clustering read when the Dynamic buffer cache got introduced.
Since bread_cluster() replaces cluster_read() I believe this can go
away.
Index: ufs/ffs/ffs_vnops.c