>I agree whole heartedly with this sentiment that atomic
>mark_buffer_dirty() should be available. My question is: shouldn't the sleeping
Minor correction: atomic is not the right adjective IMHO.
mark_buffer_dirty() should only do some more work to be backwards
compatible.
Andrea
-
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/