Re: 2.5 O)DIRECT problem

From: Steve Lord (lord@sgi.com)
Date: Fri Oct 04 2002 - 15:38:16 EST


On Fri, 2002-10-04 at 15:29, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Steve Lord wrote:
> > Either the flush needs to happen before the bounds checks, or the
> > invalidate should only be done on a successful write. It looks
> > pretty hard to detect the latter case with the current structure,
> > we can get EINVAL from the bounds check and possibly from an
> > aligned, but invalid memory address being passed in.
>
> Yes I agree; let's just do the sync before any checks.
>
> I think it should be moved into generic_file_direct_IO(),
> because that's the place where the invalidation happens, yes?

OK, sounds good to me, I will let my tests churn away on that
version and see what happens. I think something else is doing
the same thing to me elsewhere, but it might well be an xfs
specific case.

Steve

-- 

Steve Lord voice: +1-651-683-3511 Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software email: lord@sgi.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 22:00:47 EST