From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/9] fs: libfs buffered write leak fix
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 18:19:55 -0800
Message-ID: <20070202181955.a48d5b3c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20070129081905.23584.97878.sendpatchset@linux.site>
	<20070129081914.23584.23886.sendpatchset@linux.site>
	<20070202155236.dae54aa2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20070203013316.GB27300@wotan.suse.de>
	<20070202175801.3f97f79b.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20070203020926.GD27300@wotan.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:53960 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1946209AbXBCCUB (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 2 Feb 2007 21:20:01 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20070203020926.GD27300@wotan.suse.de>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 03:09:26 +0100
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:

> From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>

argh.  Yesterday all my emails were getting a mysterious
s/osdl/linux-foundation/ done to them at the server, so I switched everything
over.  Now it would appear that they are getting an equally mysterious
s/linux-foundation/osdl/ done to them.  I assume you sent this to
akpm@linux-foundation.org?


> Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Filesystems <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@kvack.org>
> Subject: Re: [patch 1/9] fs: libfs buffered write leak fix
> Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 03:09:26 +0100
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
> 
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 05:58:01PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Sat, 3 Feb 2007 02:33:16 +0100
> > Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > I think just setting page uptodate in commit_write might do the
> > > trick? (and getting rid of the set_page_dirty there).
> > 
> > Yes, the page just isn't uptodate yet in prepare_write() - moving things
> > to commti_write() sounds sane.
> > 
> > But please, can we have sufficient changelogs and comments in the next version?
> 
> You're right, sorry. Is this any better?

yup, thanks.

> (warning: nobh code is untested)

ow.