Re: [patch|rfc] block: don't mark buffers beyond end of disk as mapped

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On 2 May 2012 06:37, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> In fact, it's probably good to unify the checks here, i.e., use max_blocks()
> You really think it's worth it?  I mean, it's just an i_size_read and a
> shift, and there is precedent for it inside fs/buffer.c.  I'd prefer to
> keep the patch as-is, but will change it if you feel that strongly about
> it.

Well, I'd just like it to use identical code (because they potentially
set up buffer heads for one another to use).

I don't feel too strongly, so if anyone else does one way or the
other, that is fine. But seeing as you've updated the patch...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

[Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Yosemite]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Filesystem]

  Powered by Linux