On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Ross Zwisler
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:21:39PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> <>
>> NAK. This is fast path and it's already bloated.
>> I want to revert most changes here and rework "multiorder" entries.
>>
>> Here you
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Ross Zwisler
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:21:39PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> <>
>> NAK. This is fast path and it's already bloated.
>> I want to revert most changes here and rework "multiorder" entries.
>>
>> Here you can find almost ready
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 09:29:23AM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Ross Zwisler
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:21:39PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > <>
> >> NAK. This is fast path and it's already bloated.
> >>
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 09:29:23AM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Ross Zwisler
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:21:39PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > <>
> >> NAK. This is fast path and it's already bloated.
> >> I want to revert most changes
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:21:39PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
<>
> NAK. This is fast path and it's already bloated.
> I want to revert most changes here and rework "multiorder" entries.
>
> Here you can find almost ready patchset for that
>
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 10:21:39PM +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
<>
> NAK. This is fast path and it's already bloated.
> I want to revert most changes here and rework "multiorder" entries.
>
> Here you can find almost ready patchset for that
>
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Ross Zwisler
wrote:
> There are four cases I can see where we could end up with a NULL 'slot' in
> radix_tree_next_slot(). Yet radix_tree_next_slot() never actually checks
> whether 'slot' is NULL. It just happens that for the cases
On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Ross Zwisler
wrote:
> There are four cases I can see where we could end up with a NULL 'slot' in
> radix_tree_next_slot(). Yet radix_tree_next_slot() never actually checks
> whether 'slot' is NULL. It just happens that for the cases where 'slot' is
> NULL, some
There are four cases I can see where we could end up with a NULL 'slot' in
radix_tree_next_slot(). Yet radix_tree_next_slot() never actually checks
whether 'slot' is NULL. It just happens that for the cases where 'slot' is
NULL, some other combination of factors prevents us from dereferencing
There are four cases I can see where we could end up with a NULL 'slot' in
radix_tree_next_slot(). Yet radix_tree_next_slot() never actually checks
whether 'slot' is NULL. It just happens that for the cases where 'slot' is
NULL, some other combination of factors prevents us from dereferencing
10 matches
Mail list logo