On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Alexander Viro wrote: > > > *((unsigned long *)(&x)) = NULL; > > > > free_page(foo()) and we've got problems... > > Alan really meant > > *((unsigned long *)&(x)) = NULL; > > and screw you if it's not an lvalue. There's a lot of places that will need to be fixed after that. So many that we could as well change the prototype and pass the address explicitly - efforts will be comparable. Besides, we got a whole slew of aliases for free_pages(). Too bad that counter on struct page is impossible to grep for - (->|\.)[ ]*count\> gives more than 2600 instances ;-/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Rik van Riel
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Alexander Viro
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Linus Torvalds
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Rik van Riel
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Linus Torvalds
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Rik van Riel
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Linus Torvalds
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Alan Cox
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Alexander Viro
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Jamie Lokier
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Alexander Viro
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Arjan van de Ven
- Re: 2.4.0-test8-pre1 is quite bad / how about integrating... Daniel Phillips