* Stephen C. Tweedie ([email protected]) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 10:39, Jan Kara wrote:
>
> > Actually the patch you atached showed in the end as not covering all
> > the cases and so Stephen agreed to stay with the first try (attached)
> > which should cover all known cases (although it's not so nice).
>
> Right. The later patch is getting reworked into a proper locking
> overhaul for the journal_put_journal_head() code. The earlier one (that
> Jan attached) is the one that's appropriate in the mean time; it covers
> all of the holes we know about for sure and has proven robust in
> testing.
OK, good to know. When I last checked you were working on a higher risk
yet more complete fix, and I thought we'd wait for that one to stabilize.
Looks like the one Jan attached is the better -stable candidate?
thanks,
-chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
