On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:41:50AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> init_tlb_ubc() looked unnecessary to me: tlb_ubc is statically initialized
> with zeroes in the init_task, and copied from parent to child while it is
> quiescent in arch_dup_task_struct(); so I went to delete it.
>
> But inserted
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:41:50AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> init_tlb_ubc() looked unnecessary to me: tlb_ubc is statically initialized
> with zeroes in the init_task, and copied from parent to child while it is
> quiescent in arch_dup_task_struct(); so I went to delete it.
>
> But inserted
init_tlb_ubc() looked unnecessary to me: tlb_ubc is statically initialized
with zeroes in the init_task, and copied from parent to child while it is
quiescent in arch_dup_task_struct(); so I went to delete it.
But inserted temporary debug WARN_ONs in place of init_tlb_ubc() to check
that it was
init_tlb_ubc() looked unnecessary to me: tlb_ubc is statically initialized
with zeroes in the init_task, and copied from parent to child while it is
quiescent in arch_dup_task_struct(); so I went to delete it.
But inserted temporary debug WARN_ONs in place of init_tlb_ubc() to check
that it was
4 matches
Mail list logo