Re: 2.6.0test9 Reiserfs boot time "buffer layer error at fs/buffer.c:431"

Andrew Morton
2003-11-02T09:37:58Z

Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 11:33:54PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > aargh. I thought Debian's 2.6 kernels were unmodified. Are they carrying
> > any other changes?
>
> Yes we are. You can find the changes in
>
> http://http.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/k/kernel-source-2.6.0-test9/

Where are the separated patches?

That's 170k of stuff you're sitting on. Is there any plan to get it synced
up?

> > That _should_ work. The pagecache pages should be in such a state that all
> > buffers are freeable and yes, we can leave the pagecache there. But this
> > could cause problems if the device was repartitioned in between, or if it
> > was hotswapped. I don't think we shoot down pagecache anywhere else for
> > this.
>
> Yes, however it should be safe to stop set_blocksize from calling
> truncate_inode_pages, right?

No, because _something_ has to rub out the wrong-sized buffer_heads. One
could add some new function which walks the pagecache and removes the
buffer_heads from the pages, leaving the pages there. There doesn't seem a
lot of point in it though?