Ok, can you comment on this bug in ac8; in your opinion is it fixed in ac8+
or should I catch more debug info?
buffer.c:1312
static struct buffer_head *discard_buffer(struct buffer_head * bh)
{
[...]
spin_lock(&lru_list_lock);
write_lock(&hash_table_lock);
spin_lock(&free_list[index].lock);
spin_lock(&unused_list_lock);
if (!atomic_dec_and_test(&bh->b_count))
BUG();
__hash_unlink(bh);
/* The bunffer can be either on the regular
* queues or on the free list..
*/
if (bh->b_dev != B_FREE)
__remove_from_queues(bh);
else
-d
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2000 at 11:40:37AM -0700, David Ford wrote:
> > Alan, I am seeing this on ac8
>
> That BUG() was only added on ac13, so I'd be surprised if this were true!
>
> Cheers,
> Stephen
-- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:23 EST