[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53B5A26B.7040606@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 00:05:23 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
David Cohen <david.a.cohen@...ux.intel.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Damien Ramonda <damien.ramonda@...el.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm readahead: Fix sys_readahead breakage by reverting
2MB limit (bug 79111)
On 07/03/2014 11:52 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Raghavendra K T
> <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> If this comes from some man-page,
>>
>> Yes it is.
>
> Ok, googling actually finds a fairly recent patch to fix it
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg70517.html
>
> and several much older "that's not true" comments.
Thanks. I had missed that.
>
> That said, the bugzilla entry you mentioned does mention "can't boot
> 3.14 now". I'm not sure what the meaning of that sentence is, though.
> Does it mean "can't boot 3.14 to test it because the machine is busy",
> or is it a typo and really meant 3.15, and that some bootup script
> *depended* on readahead()? I don't know. It seems strange.
I think your guess is right, it meant to say "I can't boot it anymore
since I already upgraded to 3.15", because eventually bootup script (if
it is) should have to read IIUC.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists