Al Viro writes:
> On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 06:09:11PM +0100, Sam James wrote:
>> Sam James writes:
>>
>> > Lovely cleanup and a great suggestion from Al.
>> >
>> > Reviewed-by: Sam James
>> >
>> > I'd suggest adding a:
>> > Suggested-by: Al Viro
>>
>> Al, were you planning on taking this thro
On Sat, Apr 05, 2025 at 06:09:11PM +0100, Sam James wrote:
> Sam James writes:
>
> > Lovely cleanup and a great suggestion from Al.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Sam James
> >
> > I'd suggest adding a:
> > Suggested-by: Al Viro
>
> Al, were you planning on taking this through your tree?
FWIW, I expect
Hi Adrian,
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 at 19:22, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-02-18 at 18:55 +0100, Magnus Lindholm wrote:
> > Make pte_swp_exclusive return bool instead of int. This will better reflect
> > how pte_swp_exclusive is actually used in the code. This fixes swap/swapoff
> >
Hi Magnus,
On Tue, 2025-02-18 at 18:55 +0100, Magnus Lindholm wrote:
> Make pte_swp_exclusive return bool instead of int. This will better reflect
> how pte_swp_exclusive is actually used in the code. This fixes swap/swapoff
> problems on Alpha due pte_swp_exclusive not returning correct values wh
Sam James writes:
> Lovely cleanup and a great suggestion from Al.
>
> Reviewed-by: Sam James
>
> I'd suggest adding a:
> Suggested-by: Al Viro
Al, were you planning on taking this through your tree?
>
> thanks,
> sam
Lovely cleanup and a great suggestion from Al.
Reviewed-by: Sam James
I'd suggest adding a:
Suggested-by: Al Viro
thanks,
sam
Make pte_swp_exclusive return bool instead of int. This will better reflect
how pte_swp_exclusive is actually used in the code. This fixes swap/swapoff
problems on Alpha due pte_swp_exclusive not returning correct values when
_PAGE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE bit resides in upper 32-bits of PTE (like on alpha).
