On 8/25/15 19:35, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> OK, I guess I understand what you mean. You are certainly right that a
> partial initialization for the failure case is not nice in general. I
> was just objecting that the callers are supposed to free the vma in
> the failure case so any partial
On Tue 25-08-15 05:54:00, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 8/24/15 21:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 24-08-15 21:34:25, Chen Gang wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>
> >> It is always a little better to let the external function suppose fewer
> >> callers' behalf.
> >
> > I am sorry but I do not understand what you
On Tue 25-08-15 05:54:00, Chen Gang wrote:
On 8/24/15 21:57, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 24-08-15 21:34:25, Chen Gang wrote:
[...]
It is always a little better to let the external function suppose fewer
callers' behalf.
I am sorry but I do not understand what you are saying here.
On 8/25/15 19:35, Michal Hocko wrote:
OK, I guess I understand what you mean. You are certainly right that a
partial initialization for the failure case is not nice in general. I
was just objecting that the callers are supposed to free the vma in
the failure case so any partial initialization
On 8/25/15 05:25, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:32:13 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote:
>
>> On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
>>> From: Chen Gang
>>>
>>> When failure occurs and return, vma->vm_pgoff is already set, which is
>>> not a good idea.
>>
>> Why? The vma
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:32:13 +0200 Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
> > From: Chen Gang
> >
> > When failure occurs and return, vma->vm_pgoff is already set, which is
> > not a good idea.
>
> Why? The vma is not inserted anywhere and the failure
On Mon 24-08-15 21:34:25, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 8/24/15 19:32, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
> >>> From: Chen Gang
> >>>
> >>> When failure occurs and return, vma->vm_pgoff is already set, which is
> >>> not a good idea.
> > Why? The vma is not
On 8/24/15 19:32, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
>>> From: Chen Gang
>>>
>>> When failure occurs and return, vma->vm_pgoff is already set, which is
>>> not a good idea.
> Why? The vma is not inserted anywhere and the failure path is supposed
> to
On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
> From: Chen Gang
>
> When failure occurs and return, vma->vm_pgoff is already set, which is
> not a good idea.
Why? The vma is not inserted anywhere and the failure path is supposed
to simply free the vma.
> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang
>
On 8/24/15 19:32, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
From: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
When failure occurs and return, vma-vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good idea.
Why? The vma is not inserted anywhere and the failure path is supposed
On Mon 24-08-15 21:34:25, Chen Gang wrote:
On 8/24/15 19:32, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
From: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
When failure occurs and return, vma-vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good idea.
Why? The vma is not
On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
From: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
When failure occurs and return, vma-vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good idea.
Why? The vma is not inserted anywhere and the failure path is supposed
to simply free the vma.
On 8/25/15 05:25, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:32:13 +0200 Michal Hocko mho...@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
From: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
When failure occurs and return, vma-vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:32:13 +0200 Michal Hocko mho...@kernel.org wrote:
On Mon 24-08-15 00:59:39, gang.chen.5...@qq.com wrote:
From: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
When failure occurs and return, vma-vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good idea.
Why? The vma is not inserted
When failure occurs and return, vma->vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good idea.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang
---
mm/mmap.c | 13 +++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
index 8e0366e..b5a6f09 100644
--- a/mm/mmap.c
+++ b/mm/mmap.c
@@
When failure occurs and return, vma-vm_pgoff is already set, which is
not a good idea.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
---
mm/mmap.c | 13 +++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
index 8e0366e..b5a6f09 100644
---
16 matches
Mail list logo
