Re: linux-2.4.10-pre5

[Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>]

On Monday, September 10, 2001 03:55:19 AM +0200 Andrea Arcangeli
<andrea@suse.de> wrote:

>> The idea is more or less what has been discussed, but it did assume one
>> blocksize per mapping.  Of course, set_blocksize and invalidate_buffers
> 
> hmm, this sounds a bit odd, there must be only one "physical address
> space", the whole point of the change is to have only one and to kill
> all the aliasing issues this way. 

Sorry, I wasn't clear...when I wrote the first patch, your stuff didn't
exist ;-)  The original idea was to generalize it out so any mapping could
be used, yours will do nicely.

> In turn also set_blocksize will be
> nearly a noop and it won't matter anymore the granularity of the I/O,
> there won't be alias allowed anymore because the backing store of the
> cache (the "physical address space") will be shared by all the users
> regardless of the blocksize.
> 
> getblk should unconditionally alloc a new bh entity and only care to map
> it to the right cache backing store with a pagecache hash lookup.

Nods.

-chris