[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLE55zXt_PCmvyykP_-W26AHXOJ+zEPs3EVC-Xqazwn2tQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:08:48 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] slab fixes for 3.2-rc4
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:28:25AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > Description for 7340a0b152 "this_cpu: Introduce this_cpu_ptr() and
>> > generic this_cpu_* operations" should explain the above three.
>>
>> I don't think that's relevant.
>>
>> Sure, they have semantics, but the semantics are stupid and wrong.
>> Whether they are documented or not isn't even the issue.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:28 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> I was trying to point Pekka to documentation so that at least the
> existing semantics are clear.
Sure but well-defined semantics alone are not sufficient for a
reasonable API. It's not at all obvious which one of the four variants
to pick when writing code. I don't see any evidence that people
actually understand the API. On the contrary, I see bugs caused by API
confusion in mm/slub.c itself!
Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists