[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57EA0C86.3010303@zoho.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 14:07:02 +0800
From: zijun_hu <zijun_hu@...o.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, zijun_hu@....com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, tj@...nel.org,
mingo@...nel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
mgorman@...hsingularity.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for
__insert_vmap_area()
On 09/22/2016 07:15 AM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, zijun_hu wrote:
>
>>> We don't support inserting when va->va_start == tmp_va->va_end, plain and
>>> simple. There's no reason to do so. NACK to the patch.
>>>
>> i am sorry i disagree with you because
>> 1) in almost all context of vmalloc, original logic treat the special case as normal
>> for example, __find_vmap_area() or alloc_vmap_area()
>
> The ranges are [start, end) like everywhere else. __find_vmap_area() is
> implemented as such for the passed address. The address is aligned in
> alloc_vmap_area(), there's no surprise here. The logic is correct in
> __insert_vmap_area().
>
i am sorry to disagree with you
i will resend this patch with more detailed illustration
Powered by blists - more mailing lists