From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@linuxmail.org>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl>,
Douglas Gilbert <dougg@torque.net>, Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.4] the perils of kunmap_atomic
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:07:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041027000706.GK15367@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1098834154.7298.29.camel@desktop.cunninghams>
On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 09:31, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> Ignoring the driver-related bugs that are present due to
>> kunmap_atomic()'s weirdness, there also appears to be a big in the
>> !CONFIG_HIGHMEM implementation in 2.4.x.
>> (Bart is poking through some of the 2.6.x-related kunmap_atomic slip-ups)
>> Anyway, what do people think about the attached patch to 2.4.x? I'm
>> surprised it has gone unnoticed until now.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 09:42:34AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> On second thoughts, I think it's a bad idea to change the macro - in 2.6
> at least. There are lots of uses of kunmap_atomic, and most of them do
> the right thing. It's only inattentive people like me that need to fix
> their code. :>
> It would be good, though, to have kunmap_atomic warn on invalid
> parameters (want a patch for that?)
The bug Jeff spotted is in 2.4.x only. It's probably worth spitting out
the expected and seen virtual address, and possibly the kmap index.
-- wli
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-27 0:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-26 23:31 Jeff Garzik
2004-10-26 23:36 ` Nigel Cunningham
2004-10-28 4:20 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-10-26 23:42 ` Nigel Cunningham
2004-10-27 0:07 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2004-10-27 16:19 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2004-10-28 4:18 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20041027000706.GK15367@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=B.Zolnierkiewicz@elka.pw.edu.pl \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=dougg@torque.net \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com \
--cc=ncunningham@linuxmail.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome