2007/10/8, Hugh Dickins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Yan Zheng wrote: > > > > The test for VM_CAN_NONLINEAR always fails > Good catch indeed. Though I was puzzled how we do nonlinear at all, > until I realized it's "The test for not VM_CAN_NONLINEAR always fails". > It's not as serious as it appears, since code further down has been > added more recently to simulate nonlinear on non-RAM-backed filesystems, > instead of going the real nonlinear way; so most filesystems are now not > required to do what VM_CAN_NONLINEAR was put in to ensure they could do. > I'm confused as to where that leaves us: is this actually a fix that > needs to go into 2.6.23? or will it suddenly disable a system call > which has been silently working fine on various filesystems which did > not add VM_CAN_NONLINEAR? could we just rip out VM_CAN_NONLINEAR? > I hope Nick or Miklos is clearer on what the risks are. > (Apologies for all the "not"s and "non"s here, I'm embarrassed > after just criticizing Ingo's SCHED_NO_NO_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER!) > Hugh
Yes, I mean "The test for not VM_CAN_NONLINEAR always fails". please forgive my poor English. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
