From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758132AbcATUCX (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:02:23 -0500 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:33498 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752534AbcATUCV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:02:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 21:01:11 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Davidlohr Bueso cc: Mel Gorman , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , Chris Mason , Darren Hart , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] futex: Remove requirement for lock_page in In-Reply-To: <20160120195523.GF27825@linux-uzut.site> Message-ID: References: <1453249853-1184-1-git-send-email-dave@stgolabs.net> <20160120195523.GF27825@linux-uzut.site> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 Jan 2016, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Tue, 19 Jan 2016, Bueso wrote: > > + > > + /* Should be impossible but lets be paranoid for now */ > > + BUG_ON(inode->i_mapping != mapping); > > Hmm, do we want to transform this into an if and do rcu unlock and then just > call BUG()? I't doesn't matter at this point _anyway_, but it would be the > right > thing to do, no? The better solution is to err out gracefully. if (WARN_ON_ONCE(inode->i_mapping != mapping) { err = -EFAULT; rcu_read_unlock(); goto out; } Hmm? Thanks, tglx