Subject: Re: state of BUFQ_PRIOCSCAN
To: None <email@example.com>
From: YAMAMOTO Takashi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/20/2006 22:13:12
> email@example.com wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 07:17:43PM +0900, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> > > > Maybe the author (yamt) can explain us why is it marked experimental?
> > >
> > > i can't remember why. :)
> > I thought I remembered that you said it didn't work right because the
> > VM system didn't distinguish between pages that were dirty for different
> > reasons. I do not remember the details!
> Mentioned in this post?
> Or UVM has been improved enough in these days?
no, but it is a more generic problem than BUFQ_PRIOCSCAN, IMO.