Re: [patch/2.4] ll_rw_blk stomping on bh state [Re: kernel BUG at journal.c:1732! (2.4.19)]

[Stephen C. Tweedie]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 06:53:45PM +0000, Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
 
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 09:57:05AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > "Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
> > > 
> > >                 if (maxsector < count || maxsector - count < sector) {
> > >                         /* Yecch */
> > >                         bh->b_state &= (1 << BH_Lock) | (1 << BH_Mapped);
> > > ...
> > > Folks, just which buffer flags do we want to preserve in this case?
> 
> > Why do we want to clear any flags in there at all?  To prevent
> > a storm of error messages from a buffer which has a silly block
> > number?
> 
> That's the only reason I can think of.  Simply scrubbing all the state
> bits is totally the wrong way of going about that, of course.

So what's the vote on this?  It's a decision between clearing only the
obvious bit (BH_Dirty) on the one hand, and keeping the code as
unchanged as possible to reduce the possibility of introducing new
bugs.

But frankly I can't see any convincing argument for clearing anything
except the dirty state in this case.

--Stephen