Re: Linux 2.4.19-pre3

[Andre Hedrick]

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Jens Axboe wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 13 2002, Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > 
> > Jens,
> > 
> > Please try again because that is not the real problem.
> > All you have shown is that we disagree on the method of page walking
> > between BLOCK v/s IOCTL.  This is very minor and I agreed that it is
> > reasonable to map the IOCTL buffer in to BH or BIO so this is a net zero
> > of negative point.
> 
> No this is two issues -- you (ab)using request interface for ioctls is
> one thing, I don't care too much about that (although it spreads
> confusion and I've already seen at least one copy this code). The other
> is that the task handlers are now forced to be separate and the legacy
> handlers in ide-disk used.

Well, now that you see a little more.

The reason for segmenting the data handlers to separate and isolate the
errors and flaws in the Linus failed attempt to push forward multimode io.
Also it is not isolated to writes, it is a read issue too.
Since this is now moving to the technical asspect I wanted you to go,
please go on to the third point below.

> > How about attempting to describe the differences between the atomic and
> > what is violated by who and where.  I will help you later if you get
> > stuck.
> 
> and bingo, here comes a third issue. Please stay on track.

Please go on on the third point because coming full circle to see an error.

Cheers,

Andre Hedrick