>It will all just work
>fine. (Unless you have omitted to say things about your fs that are
>important. Why don't you show all your code rather than just those
>snippets and then proper advice can be given...)
fs is just a simple analog of ufs/ext2/minix/sysv. It is block
oriented, and I suppose that working with pages, instead of blocks
make it more complicated, then it should to be.
>You do not want the invalidate_inode_buffers() call. It makes no sense
Great, we reached the point.
Yes, my file system based on usage sb_bread/brelse.
As ordinary file system my file system implements readpage and writepage,
it is similar to
static int sysv_writepage(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc)
{
return block_write_full_page(page,get_block,wbc);
}
static int sysv_readpage(struct file *file, struct page *page)
{
return block_read_full_page(page,get_block);
}
get_block make such thing
map_bh(...)
So, when we "realloc" blocks, what happen with these "old" mapped (or
used in some other way) blocks?
How can I prevent usage "old" blocks instead of "new" blocks?
Or if I mark old and new blocks as dirty all will be right?
--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
