On 5 Apr 2000, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Summary: a page should not be in the cache and not be up-to-date. If it is
> > not up-to-date, then it should also probably be locked, but only b/c it is
> > probably in transit from the disk to the cache.
>
> Nope.
Oh yeah. Just think about it a little bit: what's the point of keeping it
in the cache if its not valid and will never become valid? The next read
operation will end up throwing it away anyway. It can only confuse things.
Besides, have a look at read_cache_page(): it's supposed to return a page
that's either uptodate or in the process of becoming uptodate. What is the
point of duplicating read_cache_page()'s code in all its callers just to
handle this silly case?
Ion
--
It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool,
than to open it and remove all doubt.
