| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: TAKE 895751 - unwritten extent buffer fix |
| From: | Craig Tierney <ctierney@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 14 Jun 2004 22:23:13 -0600 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, sgi.bugs.xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <200406150155.i5F1t4DM69795530@snort.melbourne.sgi.com> |
| References: | <200406150155.i5F1t4DM69795530@snort.melbourne.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 19:55, Nathan Scott wrote: > Ensure buffers that map to unwritten extents are only submitted > when properly setup. > > Date: Mon Jun 14 18:54:08 PDT 2004 > Workarea: snort.melbourne.sgi.com:/home/nathans/ultra-clean-xfs-linux > Inspected by: cattelan@xxxxxxx > > The following file(s) were checked into: > bonnie.engr.sgi.com:/isms/xfs-kern/xfs-linux > > > Modid: xfs-linux:xfs-kern:173555a > linux-2.6/xfs_aops.c - 1.73 > linux-2.4/xfs_aops.c - 1.80 > > So is this patch the same/similar to the patch that Manasori Tsuda worked up, or is was the problem solved differently (related to differences in xfs_inode and inode)? Craig |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | TAKE 915017 - Fix up memory allocators to try harder, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Bug 198], Russell Cattelan |
| Previous by Thread: | TAKE 895751 - unwritten extent buffer fix, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: TAKE 895751 - unwritten extent buffer fix, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |