On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Chris Mason wrote:
>
> In other words, after calling reiserfs_get_block, the buffer might be
> mapped and uptodate, with no i/o required in block_read_full_page
>
> The following patch to block_read_full_page fixes things for me, and seems
> like a good idea in general. It might be better to apply something
> similar to submit_bh instead...comments?
Making the change to submit_bh() would make it look more like the old
ll_rw_block() in this regard, but at the same time I really don't like the
old ll_rw_block() interface that knew about semantics..
Your patch looks fine, although I'd personally prefer this one even more:
fs/buffer.c patch cut-and-paste:
+++ fs/buffer.c Sat Dec 16 11:02:44 2000
@@ -1700,6 +1693,9 @@
set_bit(BH_Uptodate, &bh->b_state);
continue;
}
+ /* get_block() might have updated the buffer
synchronously */
+ if (buffer_uptodate(bh))
+ continue;
}
arr[nr] = bh;
which makes it explicit about how we could have suddenly gotten an
up-to-date buffer. Does that work for you?
Linus
-
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/
