Re: kupdate & laptop's [patch for integration of mobile-update]

Peter Englmaier (ppe@pa.uky.edu)
Sun, 15 Aug 1999 20:28:33 -0400 (EDT)

>
> On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Peter Englmaier wrote:
> >Maybe a better fix would be to integrate mobile-update in 'kupdate'?
> Your patch does "if there's been no disk activity then avoid syncing old
> buffers". Unfortunately that breaks the only thing that kupdate has to do
> and the only reason we have a [k]update (userspace or kernel) daemon.
> kupdate only cares about the dirty buffers in the system and about their
> timeout. kupdate has nothing to do with the kind of I/O in progress in the
> system.
>
> mobile-kupdate _won't_ give you any guarantee of disk cohernecy after the
> buffers-flushtime, so if you can live without a working [k]update and so
> you can deal with tons of last-year-dirty-buffers-not-yet-flushed-on-disk,
> then more simply disable kupdate 8).
>
> Andrea

Hmmm, that sounds like the spell-of-death for my patch, even for my
private use. :-) Maybe there is no solution, either I live with the
risk or loose a small amount of battery life. I wonder if the
original mobile-update was any better, i.e. less risky.

Thanks for all email...
Cheers, Peter.

-
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/