Hello, David.
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 12:44:43PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> I already tried my own version of this, but used idr_for_each_entry a
> second time. Unfortunately, the number it found and printed did not match
> recover_list_count.
>
> warning: recover_list_count 566
>
> It
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 04:18:41PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> It looks a bit weird to me that ls->ls_recover_list_count is also
> incremented by recover_list_add(). The two code paths don't seem to
> be interlocke at least upon my very shallow glance. Is it that only
> either the list or idr is
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 04:18:41PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
It looks a bit weird to me that ls-ls_recover_list_count is also
incremented by recover_list_add(). The two code paths don't seem to
be interlocke at least upon my very shallow glance. Is it that only
either the list or idr is in
Hello, David.
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 12:44:43PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
I already tried my own version of this, but used idr_for_each_entry a
second time. Unfortunately, the number it found and printed did not match
recover_list_count.
warning: recover_list_count 566
It printed
Hello, David.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 03:53:20PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> The function description is misleading. The function does search
> inclusive range and needs explicit cursor increment to make progress.
> Weird that it doesn't work. Looking into it. I'll write when I know
> more.
It
Hello, David.
Sorry about the delay.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:24:18PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the list_for_each_entry doesn't seem to be clearing
> > everything. I've seen "warning: recover_list_count 39" at the end of that
> > function.
>
> I don't want to pretend to
Hello, David.
Sorry about the delay.
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:24:18PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
Unfortunately, the list_for_each_entry doesn't seem to be clearing
everything. I've seen warning: recover_list_count 39 at the end of that
function.
I don't want to pretend to
Hello, David.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 03:53:20PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
The function description is misleading. The function does search
inclusive range and needs explicit cursor increment to make progress.
Weird that it doesn't work. Looking into it. I'll write when I know
more.
It
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:13:17AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:57:23AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > > idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
> > > deprecated.
> > >
> >
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:13:17AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:57:23AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
deprecated.
The
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:57:23AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
> > deprecated.
> >
> > The conversion isn't completely trivial for recover_idr_clear() as
> >
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:57:23AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
deprecated.
The conversion isn't completely trivial for recover_idr_clear() as
it's the only
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
> idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
> deprecated.
>
> The conversion isn't completely trivial for recover_idr_clear() as
> it's the only place in kernel which makes legitimate use of
> idr_remove_all()
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Tejun Heo wrote:
idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
deprecated.
The conversion isn't completely trivial for recover_idr_clear() as
it's the only place in kernel which makes legitimate use of
idr_remove_all() w/o
idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
deprecated.
The conversion isn't completely trivial for recover_idr_clear() as
it's the only place in kernel which makes legitimate use of
idr_remove_all() w/o idr_destroy(). Replace it with idr_remove() call
inside
idr_destroy() can destroy idr by itself and idr_remove_all() is being
deprecated.
The conversion isn't completely trivial for recover_idr_clear() as
it's the only place in kernel which makes legitimate use of
idr_remove_all() w/o idr_destroy(). Replace it with idr_remove() call
inside
16 matches
Mail list logo
