On Tue, Feb 15, 2005 at 11:51:52AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Ok, so it is merely a cosmetic issue.
In practice it's solved, I didn't mean we had a bug still, I'm just suggesting to fix it in a diffeerent way. It's not just for cosmetic reasons that I suggest to change this. My point is that the _real_ reason why we had the bug in the first place is that people forgets that p->size includes the guard page (because it shouldn't include the guard page). The fundamental problem of vmalloc exposing the guard page to the callers (which makes it prone for mistakes, and prone for breakage if somebody needs all virtual space and removes the guard page), isn't solved yet. > I was worried about an actual bug :) No bugs anymore in practice, the -PAGE_SIZE in arch/x86* is clearly equivalent to -PAGE_SIZE in mm/vmalloc.c, in practice it's the same either ways. > No problem with changing it, but hopefully after 2.6.11. Ok fine with me, take your time it's clearly not urgent because in practice no bug can be triggered anymore ;). thanks! - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/