On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 2:58 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> up is quite short and not-specific for global symbol. Rename to mutex_up?
Well, it is quite the traditional name in the OS community and in
Linux it goes back to before the 1.0 release.
We've got about 450 each of the up() and the down() (
On Tue 2017-09-26 02:00:36, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 03:18:29PM -0700, Kyle Huey wrote:
> > Beginning with 553f770ef71b, the following program fails when compiled
> > for 32 bit and executed on a 64 bit kernel and succeeds when compiled
> > for and executed on a 64 bit. It continue
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> Can I assume your normal S-o-b on that? Just noticed that thing sitting
> in misc queue with mismatched Author: and Signed-off-by:...
Yup, just add my sign-off.
Thanks,
Linus
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 06:03:35PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:02:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > Which tree do you prefer it to go through? Direct to mainline, or vfs.git
> > > #for-next?
> >
> > for-next,
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:02:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > Which tree do you prefer it to go through? Direct to mainline, or vfs.git
> > #for-next?
>
> for-next, it's not like it's in any way urgent.
Can I assume your normal S-o-b o
Christoph Hellwig writes:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 06:37:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> Pulled and pushed out, but I'd like to note that sparse would have
>> caught this. Except we are so far away from being sparse-clean that
>> nobody runs it.
>
> I tend to run sparse over the nvme code b
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:07:01PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > I agree. It might be better to just remove the address space logic,
> > because afaik it never worked for them.
>
> .. and sadly, we should probably disable the locki
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 06:37:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Pulled and pushed out, but I'd like to note that sparse would have
> caught this. Except we are so far away from being sparse-clean that
> nobody runs it.
I tend to run sparse over the nvme code before sending pull request
every tim
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 07:07:01PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > I agree. It might be better to just remove the address space logic,
> > because afaik it never worked for them.
>
> .. and sadly, we should probably disable the locki
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> I agree. It might be better to just remove the address space logic,
> because afaik it never worked for them.
.. and sadly, we should probably disable the locking ones by default
too, because while they *work*, sparse only handles static
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> FWIW, __percpu and __rcu annotations are messy as hell. Never got around
> to sorting down the infrastructure annotations for that bunch, and I'm
> not entirely sure that they (especially __rcu) are a good match for
> __address_space__(()).
I a
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> Which tree do you prefer it to go through? Direct to mainline, or vfs.git
> #for-next?
for-next, it's not like it's in any way urgent.
Linus
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 02:46:56AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 06:37:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > And I think your recent compat cleanup work actually made it worse,
> > showing new warnings (including the one that was a real bug)
>
> Actually, they are not new - tr
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 06:37:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> And I think your recent compat cleanup work actually made it worse,
> showing new warnings (including the one that was a real bug)
Actually, they are not new - try make C=2 ipc/compat.o on v4.13 and you'll
see their previous locati
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>
> I really wish gcc warned about conversions from pointer to function into
> void *...
Pulled and pushed out, but I'd like to note that sparse would have
caught this. Except we are so far away from being sparse-clean that
nobody runs it.
And I th
15 matches
Mail list logo
