Re: set_page_dirty vs set_page_dirty_lock

Quoting Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>:
> Many would be pleased if we could manage without set_page_dirty_lock.

Yes, it forces me to bounce a work into a queue from the interrupt.
Thanks!

-- 
MST
-
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:
  • Re: set_page_dirty vs set_page_dirty_lock
    • From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.{14,15-rc4} harddrive cache not detected
• Next by Date: [PATCH RESEND] via82cxxx IDE: Add VT8251 ISA bridge
• Previous by thread: Re: set_page_dirty vs set_page_dirty_lock
• Next by thread: Re: set_page_dirty vs set_page_dirty_lock
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]