On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 07:13:26PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 08:21:53PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > +/**
> > > + * xa_is_internal() - Is the entry an internal entry?
> > > + * @entry: Entry retrieved from the XArray
>
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 07:05:34PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 08:15:42PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > 28 files changed, 249 insertions(+), 240 deletions(-)
> >
> > Everything looks fine to me after quick scan, but hat's a lot of c
NULL);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(>pages.xa_lock, flags);
>
> More details here: https://9p.io/sys/doc/compiler.html
Yeah, that's neat.
Dealing with old compilers is frustrating...
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linu
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 07:43:40PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 07:54:40PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 02:03:35PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > From: Matthew Wilcox <mawil...@microsoft.com>
> > >
entry"? Is it just a term for non-value and
non-data pointer entry? Do we allow anybody besides xarray implementation to
use internal entires?
Do we have it documented?
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
if (index > end)
> break;
>
> - if (radix_tree_exceptional_entry(page)) {
> + if (xa_is_value(page)) {
> if (!invalidate_exceptional_entry2(mapping,
>
gt; since we don't really care that it's a tree. Take the opportunity to
> rearrange the elements of address_space to pack them better on 64-bit,
> and make the comments more useful.
The description sounds a lot like three commits ;)
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: se
subject and commit message. At first
I was confused why do you need to touch idr here. It took few minutes to figure
it out.
Could you please add more into commit message about lockname and xa_ locking
interface since you introduce it here?
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
To unsubscribe from this l
Kirill's patch does. oops.
Ack? ;)
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
From: Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com
Sorry for resend. Original mail had too long cc list.
There's no reason to call rcu_barrier() on every deactivate_locked_super().
We only need to make sure that all delayed rcu free inodes are flushed
before we destroy related cache
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 02:43:58PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov
kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote:
From: Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com
There's no reason to call rcu_barrier() on every deactivate_locked_super
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:02:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 00:41:03 +0300
Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote:
There's no reason to call rcu_barrier() on every deactivate_locked_super().
We only need to make sure that all delayed rcu free inodes
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:25:50PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 01:14:46 +0300
Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:02:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jun 2012 00:41:03 +0300
Kirill A. Shutemov kirill.shute
CC: Yan Zheng yanzh...@21cn.com
Reported-by: Kirill A. Shutemov kir...@shutemov.name
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang fengguang...@intel.com
---
Andrew and Greg:
This is an obvious correct bug fix for .34 and .33-stable,
so I'm resending it directly to you without Kirill's confirmation.
Sorry
On lastest Linus' git.
[ 4005.426805] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0021
[ 4005.426818] IP: [c109a130] page_cache_sync_readahead+0x18/0x3e
[ 4005.426837] *pde =
[ 4005.426844] Oops: [#1] PREEMPT SMP
[ 4005.426854] last sysfs file:
15 matches
Mail list logo
