Re: [PATCH] State limits to safety of _safe iterators

2007-09-17 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 05:21:51PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:21:07 -0700 > "Paul E. McKenney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 02:22:45AM -0700, Matthew Helsley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 18:01 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > The _safe

Re: [PATCH] State limits to safety of _safe iterators

2007-09-14 Thread Andrew Morton
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:21:07 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 02:22:45AM -0700, Matthew Helsley wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 18:01 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > The _safe list iterators make a blanket statement about how they are > > > safe a

Re: [PATCH] State limits to safety of _safe iterators

2007-09-13 Thread Paul E. McKenney
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 02:22:45AM -0700, Matthew Helsley wrote: > On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 18:01 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > The _safe list iterators make a blanket statement about how they are > > safe against removal. This patch, inspired by private conversations > > with people who unwisel

Re: [PATCH] State limits to safety of _safe iterators

2007-09-13 Thread Matthew Helsley
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 18:01 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > The _safe list iterators make a blanket statement about how they are > safe against removal. This patch, inspired by private conversations > with people who unwisely but perhaps understandably took this blanket > statement at its word, a