On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Alexander Viro wrote: > Except that the only reason why check for page being uptodate is correct > is that for such pages we are guaranteed that buffer ring will not be > dropped when page contatins data newer than on disk. Ugh. Translation: The only reason why the simple check for page being uptodate is enough to avoid killing data with bogus rereads is that for pages that are NOT uptodate we are guaranteed that buffer ring will not be dropped when data in page is newer than on disk. Sorry. - 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/
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- [PATCH] Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Daniel Phillips
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Daniel Phillips
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Daniel Phillips
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Linus Torvalds
- Re: The INN/mmap bug Alexander Viro