On Tue, Nov 28 2000, Petr Vandrovec wrote:
> On 28 Nov 00 at 12:04, David S. Miller wrote:
> >
> > Yes, it is identical copy. But I do not think that hdd can write same
> > data into two places with one command...
> >
> > Petr, did the af_inet.c assertions get triggered on this
> > same machine?
>
> No, ext2fs is at home, and af_inet is at work... At work I'm using
> vmware, at home I do not use it... But kernel sources are same
> (g450 patch for matroxfb, ncpfs supporting device nodes, threaded ipx;
> but neither ncpfs nor ipx is compiled at home).
> Petr Vandrovec
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Petr,
Could you try and reproduce with attached patch? If this would trigger
I would assume fs corruption as well (which doesn't seem to be the
case for you), but it's worth a shot.
--- drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c~ Wed Nov 29 01:30:22 2000
+++ drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c Wed Nov 29 01:33:00 2000
@@ -684,7 +684,7 @@
int max_segments = MAX_SEGMENTS;
struct request * req = NULL, *freereq = NULL;
int rw_ahead, max_sectors, el_ret;
- struct list_head *head = &q->queue_head;
+ struct list_head *head;
int latency;
elevator_t *elevator = &q->elevator;
@@ -734,6 +734,7 @@
*/
again:
spin_lock_irq(&io_request_lock);
+ head = &q->queue_head;
/*
* skip first entry, for devices with active queue head
--
* Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
