Hi,
> No, since you are using the functionality that was never promised to be
> there. Example: fs has a perfect right to copy superblock out of the
> buffer cache and slam it back whenever it wants, completely ignoring any
> changes you've done to buffer cache. Or to keep it in pagecache and don't
> have buffer heads hashed. You are _not_ supposed to bypass r/w filesystem
> - it has absolute access to the device and that's the end of the story.
But in the current sources I see nowhere where the buffer heads are
released. Is that intended and will be cleaned up in 2.5? Buffer heads are
really huge, so I can understand it to keep them only as long as
neccessary, but I don't see where it's done.
Anyway, there is another use for keeping buffer and page cache in sync,
that way we could better support filesystems with blocksizes smaller than
the disk blocksize. I think only fat has some ugly support for this, but
even there I'm not sure it still works. Did someone tried fat on a disk
with a block size larger than 512 bytes? Nevertheless it would be great if
such stuff would be (properly) supported by the vfs and here I think the
buffer cache could be used for that or any other ideas?
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 15 2000 - 21:00:12 EST