Re: [PATCH] writepage method changes

2001-05-10 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Thu, 10 May 2001, Chris Mason wrote: > > > On Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:51:17 PM -0300 Marcelo Tosatti > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 9 May 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > >> Locked for the "not wrote out case" (I will fix my patch now, thanks) > > > > I just fo

Re: [PATCH] writepage method changes

2001-05-10 Thread Chris Mason
On Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:51:17 PM -0300 Marcelo Tosatti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 May 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > >> Locked for the "not wrote out case" (I will fix my patch now, thanks) > > I just found out that there are filesystems (eg reiserfs) which write out >

Re: [PATCH] writepage method changes

2001-05-10 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > Locked for the "not wrote out case" (I will fix my patch now, thanks) I just found out that there are filesystems (eg reiserfs) which write out data even if an error ocurred, which means the unlocking must be done by the filesystems, always. - To

Re: [PATCH] writepage method changes

2001-05-10 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Thu, 10 May 2001, Andrew Morton wrote: > Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > Well, > > > > Here is the updated version of the patch to add the "priority" argument to > > writepage(). > > It appears that a -EIO return from block_write_full_page() will > result in an unlock of an unlocked page i

[PATCH] writepage method changes

2001-05-09 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
Well, Here is the updated version of the patch to add the "priority" argument to writepage(). All implementations have been fixed. No referenced bit changes as I still think its not worth passing this information down to writepage(). Note: I've removed ramfs_writepage(). If there is no writep