On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 04:48:11PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 03/29/12 16:10, Dave Chinner wrote: > >On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 02:04:09PM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > >If the previous user of the buffer got an error, it is not > >guaranteed to be cleared because the buffer is not re-initialised. > >i.e. it's an uncached buffer that we control completely and reuse > >from IO to IO with just a reset of the bno and length. If b_error is > >non zero here, then the IO can fail because nothing else clears the > >error in the dispatch path.... > > Thank-you for the explanation. > > FYI: I am having problems with the patches applying. This patch > complained at hunk at offset 623. Maybe I am using too new of kernel > source. That's because they are based on top of a current TOT mainline and Christoph's dio ilock and xfsbufd removal changes. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
