[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected
    Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > * Mike Travis <> wrote:
    >>> could you please send whatever .c changes you have already, so that
    >>> we can have a look at how the end result will look like? Doesnt have
    >>> to build, i'm just curious about how it looks like in practice,
    >>> semantically.
    >> I will, and the full "allyesconfig" does compile. And it's basically
    >> a benign change in that the functionality is still the same. I'm
    >> currently reordering it a bit to clean it up.
    > btw., are the resulting instructions also expected to be the same? If
    > yes then you might want to verify it all by making sure the md5's of the
    > .o's do not change.
    > (If that's not possible (gcc decides to compile it a bit differently)
    > then no big deal, just wanted to mention the possibility.)
    > Ingo

    Well, not exactly... ;-) It does institute the new API change that specifies
    only pointers to cpumask's can be passed to functions and returned from
    functions. I really wanted the default cpumask_t to be a constant so those
    instances where the passed in cpumask is used as a read/write temp variable
    would be caught. But it started getting messy.

    One pain is:

    typedef struct __cpumask_s *cpumask_t;
    const cpumask_t xxx;

    is not the same as:

    typedef const struct __cpumask_s *const_cpumask_t;
    const_cpumask_t xxx;

    and I'm not exactly sure why. It came up when I tried to declare
    functions that returned a constant cpumask_t pointer (node_to_cpumask,
    cpumask_of_cpu, etc.)

    The other major change I'm contemplating is to remove "cpumask_t" completely
    (maybe cpumask_ptr_t?). This would force every instance of cpumask_t to be
    examined. (I found quite a few I had missed in my original edits when I
    added the task struct temp cpumask's.)

    Oh yeah, one question ... is "current" always valid?


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-09-30 18:17    [W:0.028 / U:32.276 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site