On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 06:19:55PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 03:09:26 +0100
> Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
> > To: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>
>
> argh. Yesterday all my emails were getting a mysterious
> s/osdl/linux-foundation/ done to them at the server, so I switched everything
> over. Now it would appear that they are getting an equally mysterious
> s/linux-foundation/osdl/ done to them. I assume you sent this to
> akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?
No. Your first reply I got to this patch came as linux-foundantion, and
that's what I replied to. Your subsequent reply back to me ("Yes, the page
just isn't uptodate yet..."), came from osdl.org, which is what I replied
to.
> > Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: [patch 1/9] fs: libfs buffered write leak fix
> > Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 03:09:26 +0100
> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 05:58:01PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 02:33:16 +0100
> > > Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think just setting page uptodate in commit_write might do the
> > > > trick? (and getting rid of the set_page_dirty there).
> > >
> > > Yes, the page just isn't uptodate yet in prepare_write() - moving things
> > > to commti_write() sounds sane.
> > >
> > > But please, can we have sufficient changelogs and comments in the next version?
> >
> > You're right, sorry. Is this any better?
>
> yup, thanks.
>
> > (warning: nobh code is untested)
>
> ow.
I'll get a chance to do that later today. I have to fire up the old test
case and see if I can reproduce the problem with nobh on a real fs...
Will get back to you when I do.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
