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
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
>
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
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
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
5 matches
Mail list logo