1. 17 3月, 2007 2 次提交
  2. 15 2月, 2007 1 次提交
    • T
      [PATCH] remove many unneeded #includes of sched.h · cd354f1a
      Tim Schmielau 提交于
      After Al Viro (finally) succeeded in removing the sched.h #include in module.h
      recently, it makes sense again to remove other superfluous sched.h includes.
      There are quite a lot of files which include it but don't actually need
      anything defined in there.  Presumably these includes were once needed for
      macros that used to live in sched.h, but moved to other header files in the
      course of cleaning it up.
      
      To ease the pain, this time I did not fiddle with any header files and only
      removed #includes from .c-files, which tend to cause less trouble.
      
      Compile tested against 2.6.20-rc2 and 2.6.20-rc2-mm2 (with offsets) on alpha,
      arm, i386, ia64, mips, powerpc, and x86_64 with allnoconfig, defconfig,
      allmodconfig, and allyesconfig as well as a few randconfigs on x86_64 and all
      configs in arch/arm/configs on arm.  I also checked that no new warnings were
      introduced by the patch (actually, some warnings are removed that were emitted
      by unnecessarily included header files).
      Signed-off-by: NTim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de>
      Acked-by: NRussell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      cd354f1a
  3. 13 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  4. 31 1月, 2007 2 次提交
  5. 06 1月, 2007 1 次提交
    • E
      [PATCH] fix garbage instead of zeroes in UFS · d63b7090
      Evgeniy Dushistov 提交于
      Looks like this is the problem, which point Al Viro some time ago:
      
      ufs's get_block callback allocates 16k of disk at a time, and links that
      entire 16k into the file's metadata.  But because get_block is called for only
      a single buffer_head (a 2k buffer_head in this case?) we are only able to tell
      the VFS that this 2k is buffer_new().
      
      So when ufs_getfrag_block() is later called to map some more data in the file,
      and when that data resides within the remaining 14k of this fragment,
      ufs_getfrag_block() will incorrectly return a !buffer_new() buffer_head.
      
      I don't see _right_ way to do nullification of whole block, if use inode
      page cache, some pages may be outside of inode limits (inode size), and
      will be lost; if use blockdev page cache it is possible to zero real data,
      if later inode page cache will be used.
      
      The simpliest way, as can I see usage of block device page cache, but not only
      mark dirty, but also sync it during "nullification".  I use my simple tests
      collection, which I used for check that create,open,write,read,close works on
      ufs, and I see that this patch makes ufs code 18% slower then before.
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
      d63b7090
  6. 06 8月, 2006 1 次提交
  7. 02 7月, 2006 1 次提交
  8. 26 6月, 2006 10 次提交
  9. 15 1月, 2006 1 次提交
    • E
      [PATCH] ufs cleanup · 7b4ee73e
      Evgeniy 提交于
      Here is update of ufs cleanup patch, brought on by the recently fixed
      ubh_get_usb_second() bug that made some ugly code rather painfully
      obvious.  It also includes
      
       - fix compilation warnings which appears if debug mode turn on
       - remove unnecessary duplication of code to support UFS2
      
      I tested it on ufs1 and ufs2 file-systems.
      Signed-off-by: NEvgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@mail.ru>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
      7b4ee73e
  10. 12 1月, 2006 1 次提交
  11. 08 9月, 2005 1 次提交
  12. 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux-2.6.12-rc2 · 1da177e4
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
      even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
      archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
      3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
      git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
      infrastructure for it.
      
      Let it rip!
      1da177e4