Re: [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Zach Brown wrote:
> 
> I think that test should be changed to

How about not testing at all? Which was what the old code did.

Just do the invalidate unconditionally for any writes, and screw the end 
result of the invalidate, since we cannot afford to overwrite the previous 
return value anyway in any realistic scenario?

		Linus
-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write
    • From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write
    • From: Karl Schendel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write
    • From: Zach Brown <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] audit: clear thread flag for new children
• Next by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Fix hang in posix_locks_deadlock()
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Fix bad data from non-direct-io read after direct-io write
• 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]