On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Sep 14, Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> - the whole active file is now 100% identical to the saved copy
> >Ugh... How about relevant subset of strace?
> I tried doing that for Andrea but I think it's not useful, active is
> mmapped and strace shows nothing interesting.
mmapped... Does mmap() go past the end of file?
> >> Right now it happened after the daily expire run: I stopped INN and the
> >> file on disk changed to the copy I saved before expire started.
> >Wait a minute. I don't believe in on-disk file being restored by magic,
> >but I could believe in page(s) being never written to disk and giving the
> >impression of "update that doesn't stick". You have a file shorter than
> Sure, this is what I meant.
> But what about the mtime which does not get updated?
Well, _that_ makes perfect sense - after all, you update mtime when you
write the data and that is the part that didn't happen.
> >BTW, how does test8+patch to block_truncate_page() behave?
> I missed it, do you still have the patch?
Sure. Apply to fs/buffer.c:
@@ -1758,13 +1758,14 @@
pos += blocksize;
}
+ err = 0;
+ if (!buffer_mapped(bh)) {
+ get_block(inode, iblock, bh, 0);
+ if (!buffer_mapped(bh))
+ goto unlock;
+ }
+
if (!buffer_uptodate(bh)) {
- err = 0;
- if (!buffer_mapped(bh)) {
- get_block(inode, iblock, bh, 0);
- if (!buffer_mapped(bh))
- goto unlock;
- }
err = -EIO;
bh->b_end_io = end_buffer_io_sync;
ll_rw_block(READ, 1, &bh);
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
