From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from digeo-nav01.digeo.com (digeo-nav01.digeo.com [192.168.1.233]) by packet.digeo.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id JAA01383 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:57:06 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3DD140F1.F4AED387@digeo.com> Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:57:05 -0800 From: Andrew Morton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [patch/2.4] ll_rw_blk stomping on bh state [Re: kernel BUG at journal.c:1732! (2.4.19)] References: <20021028111357.78197071.nutts@penguinmail.com> <20021112150711.F2837@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "Stephen C. Tweedie" Cc: Mark Hazell , adilger@clusterfs.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: "Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote: > > if (maxsector < count || maxsector - count < sector) { > /* Yecch */ > bh->b_state &= (1 << BH_Lock) | (1 << BH_Mapped); > > ... > > Folks, just which buffer flags do we want to preserve in this case? > Why do we want to clear any flags in there at all? To prevent a storm of error messages from a buffer which has a silly block number? If so, how about setting a new state bit which causes subsequent IO attempts to silently drop the IO on the floor? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/