From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:15:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:15:39 -0400 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:36888 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 13:15:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 19:15:22 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Stefan.Bader@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: correction: fs/buffer.c underlocking async pages Message-ID: <20010621191522.B28327@athlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20010621173833.L29084@athlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: ; from torvalds@transmeta.com on Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 09:56:04AM -0700 X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 09:56:04AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: What's the problem with the existing code, and why do people want to add a > (unnecessary) new bit? there's no problem with the existing code, what I understood is that they cannot overwrite the ->b_end_io callback in the lowlevel blkdev layer or the page will be unlocked too early. Andrea