On 04/30/2014 05:00 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:42:55 -0400 Rik van Riel <r...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:13:53 -0700
Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
This was a consequence of 64->32 truncation and it can't happen any
more, can it?
Andrew, this is cleaner indeed :)
I'm starting to get worried about 32-bit wraparound in the patch
version number ;)
Masayoshi-san, does the bug still happen with this version, or does
this fix the problem?
We could put something like
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(setpoint == limit))
setpoint--;
in there if we're not sure. But it's better to be sure!
The more I look at the code, the more I am convinced that
Michal is right, and we cannot actually hit the case that
"limit - setpoint + 1 == 0".
Setpoint always seems to be some in-between point.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
