> Now, I also agree that we should be able to clean this up properly for > 2.5.x, and actually do exactly this for the anonymous buffers, so that > the VM no longer needs to worry about buffer knowledge, and fs/buffer.c > becomes just another user of the writepage functionality. That is not > all that hard to do, it mainly just requires some small changes to how Why not incorporate this change into 2.4.x? Jeff - 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: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Chris Mason
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Marcelo Tosatti
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Andreas Dilger
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Marcelo Tosatti
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Chris Mason
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Daniel Phillips
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Chris Mason
- Re: [RFC] changes to buffer.c (... Chris Mason
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Russell Cattelan
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Russell Cattelan
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Jeff Chua
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Linus Torvalds
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Chris Mason
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Linus Torvalds
- Re: Test12 ll_rw_block error. Chris Mason