nguishing between the radix_tree_shrink() and the delete_node()
> sites was essential to find the bug whose fix added these warnings.
> The former gets inlined into the latter. Not impossible to figure out
> which one triggered from a full dump, but certainly less robust.
This?
>From 669
On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 09:31:51PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> From: Johannes Weiner [mailto:han...@cmpxchg.org]
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 05:28:23PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > The newly introduced warning in radix_tree_free_nodes() was testing the
> > > wrong variable; it should have
From: Johannes Weiner [mailto:han...@cmpxchg.org]
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 05:28:23PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > The newly introduced warning in radix_tree_free_nodes() was testing the
> > wrong variable; it should have been 'old' instead of 'node'. Rather
> > than replace that one instance
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 05:28:23PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> From: Matthew Wilcox
>
> The newly introduced warning in radix_tree_free_nodes() was testing the
> wrong variable; it should have been 'old' instead of 'node'. Rather
> than replace that one instance, I noticed that we can simply
From: Matthew Wilcox
The newly introduced warning in radix_tree_free_nodes() was testing the
wrong variable; it should have been 'old' instead of 'node'. Rather
than replace that one instance, I noticed that we can simply put the
WARN_ON_ONCE in radix_tree_node_free() and it will be just as effe
5 matches
Mail list logo
