Re: [PATCH] mb_cache_shrink() frees unexpected caches

2005-07-16 (Sat) 03:44 +0200 Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> Removing the cache parameter from mb_cache_shrink would break when more than 
> one mb_cache is used per filesystem, correct. Leaving the parameter in and 
> adding your patch is more "future proof", so I'm fine with it. Are you 
> actually using more than one mb_cache, or is this theoretical?

This is just theorecal.

Now I agree with your two patches except for the name of
"mb_cache_shrink".  it should be renamed to imply that this function
shrinks all sort of mbcache on specified block device.





-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] mb_cache_shrink() frees unexpected caches
    • From: Akinobu Mita <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] mb_cache_shrink() frees unexpected caches
    • From: Andreas Gruenbacher <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] mb_cache_shrink() frees unexpected caches
    • From: Akinobu Mita <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] mb_cache_shrink() frees unexpected caches
    • From: Andreas Gruenbacher <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [rfc patch 2/2] direct-io: remove address alignment check
• Next by Date: Re: 2.6.12 vs. /sbin/cardmgr
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] mb_cache_shrink() frees unexpected caches
• Next by thread: rcu-refcount stacker performance
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]