xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [xfs-masters] swsusp vs. xfs [was Re: 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]

To: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [xfs-masters] swsusp vs. xfs [was Re: 2.6.12-rc2-mm1]
From: "Barry K. Nathan" <barryn@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 04:50:41 -0700
Cc: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>, "Barry K. Nathan" <barryn@xxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hare@xxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050412110425.GA3063@elf.ucw.cz>
References: <20050410211808.GA12118@ip68-4-98-123.oc.oc.cox.net> <20050410212747.GB26316@elf.ucw.cz> <20050410225708.GB12118@ip68-4-98-123.oc.oc.cox.net> <20050410230053.GD12794@elf.ucw.cz> <20050411043124.GA24626@ip68-4-98-123.oc.oc.cox.net> <20050411105759.GB1373@elf.ucw.cz> <20050411231213.GD702@frodo> <20050411235110.GA2472@elf.ucw.cz> <20050412002603.GA1178@frodo> <20050412110425.GA3063@elf.ucw.cz>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6i
On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 01:04:25PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > OK, so if that doesn't help, here's an alternate approach - this
> > lets xfsbufd track when its entering the refrigerator(), so that
> > other callers know that attempts to wake it are futile.
> 
> Thanks, this patch helped.

I can confirm, the 2nd patch worked and the 1st one didn't. (This is
against 2.6.12-rc2-mm1 with sched-x86-patch-name-is-way-too-long.patch
backed out. ;) )

-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@xxxxxxxxx>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>