diff for duplicates of <20170727180355.GB26633@linux.intel.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 891b4b9..877cf53 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 04:12:18PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > > In short, clean_buffers() must be called before unlocking > > > lock_page(). > > -> > Thanks for that. This should fix the problem while not leaking the +> > Thanks for that.��This should fix the problem while not leaking the > > unlock_page call outside bdev_write_page. > > > > --- 8< --- @@ -20,13 +20,9 @@ On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 04:12:18PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote: > > Tested-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com> > -> Out of curiosity, I am still wondering about the following: +> Out of curiosity, I am still wondering about the following:� > - Why is this issue exposed with FAT FS, but not with other FSs? > - Why did I not see this issue with BTT? I also didn't see it with FAT + BRD, so I think the answer to both of the above is just that the timings were different. -_______________________________________________ -Linux-nvdimm mailing list -Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org -https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index ca2c3be..a9d9e13 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -9,10 +9,12 @@ "Date\0Thu, 27 Jul 2017 12:03:55 -0600\0" "To\0Kani" " Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@hpe.com>\0" - "Cc\0linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>" + "Cc\0hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>" willy@infradead.org <willy@infradead.org> - linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org> - " hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>\0" + ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com> + linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org> + jthumshirn@suse.de <jthumshirn@suse.de> + " linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 04:12:18PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:\n" @@ -25,7 +27,7 @@ "> > > In short, clean_buffers() must be called before unlocking\n" "> > > lock_page().\n" "> > \n" - "> > Thanks for that.\302\240\302\240This should fix the problem while not leaking the\n" + "> > Thanks for that.\303\257\302\277\302\275\303\257\302\277\302\275This should fix the problem while not leaking the\n" "> > unlock_page call outside bdev_write_page.\n" "> > \n" "> > --- 8< ---\n" @@ -37,15 +39,11 @@ "> \n" "> Tested-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hpe.com>\n" "> \n" - "> Out of curiosity, I am still wondering about the following:\302\240\n" + "> Out of curiosity, I am still wondering about the following:\303\257\302\277\302\275\n" "> - Why is this issue exposed with FAT FS, but not with other FSs?\n" "> - Why did I not see this issue with BTT?\n" "\n" "I also didn't see it with FAT + BRD, so I think the answer to both of the\n" - "above is just that the timings were different.\n" - "_______________________________________________\n" - "Linux-nvdimm mailing list\n" - "Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org\n" - https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm + above is just that the timings were different. -a4969dcbb3b000ed6c560ff79614ae73c391171b63f7bc4716dcd8260af30c9a +796417679c2453e889b9cf425e5c16f550412272a323148fa4e0f07b41cc0f7a
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.