* Stephen C. Tweedie ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 19:38, Chris Wright wrote: > > > OK, good to know. When I last checked you were working on a higher risk > > yet more complete fix, and I thought we'd wait for that one to stabilize. > > Looks like the one Jan attached is the better -stable candidate? > > Definitely; it's the one I gave akpm. The lock reworking is going to > remove one layer of locks, so it's worthwhile from that point of view; > but it's longer-term, and I don't know for sure of any paths to chaos > with that simpler journal_unmap_buffer() fix in place. (It's just very > hard to _prove_ all cases are correct without the locking rework.)
Great, I'll add to -stable queue. Thanks Stephen. -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - 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/
