From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Whitehouse Subject: Re: Status of buffered write path (deadlock fixes) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 16:12:32 +0000 Message-ID: <1165853552.3752.1015.camel@quoit.chygwyn.com> References: <45751712.80301@yahoo.com.au> <20061207195518.GG4497@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <4578DBCA.30604@yahoo.com.au> <20061208234852.GI4497@ca-server1.us.oracle.com> <457D20AE.6040107@yahoo.com.au> <457D7EBA.7070005@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <457D7EBA.7070005@yahoo.com.au> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nick Piggin Cc: Mark Fasheh , Linux Memory Management , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel , OGAWA Hirofumi , Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-mm.kvack.org Hi, On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 02:52 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: > > Mark Fasheh wrote: > > >> ->commit_write() would probably do fine. Currently, block_prepare_write() > >> uses it to know which buffers were newly allocated (the file system > >> specific > >> get_block_t sets the bit after allocation). I think we could safely move > >> the clearing of that bit to block_commit_write(), thus still allowing > >> us to > >> detect and zero those blocks in generic_file_buffered_write() > > > > > > OK, great, I'll make a few patches and see how they look. What did you > > think of those other uninitialised buffer problems in my first email? > > Hmm, doesn't look like we can do this either because at least GFS2 > uses BH_New for its own special things. > What makes you say that? As far as I know we are not doing anything we shouldn't with this flag, and if we are, then I'm quite happy to consider fixing it up so that we don't, Steve.