Re: [PATCH v2] hugetlb: fix race condition in hugetlb_fault()

[Chris Metcalf]

On 4/6/2012 7:35 PM, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 16:10:13 -0700 (PDT)
>> Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The resulting patch is okay; but let's reassure Chris that his
>>> original patch was better, before he conceded to make the get_page
>>> and put_page unconditional, and added unnecessary detail of the race.
>>>
>> Yes, the v1 patch was better.  No reason was given for changing it?
> I think Chris was aiming to be a model citizen, and followed review
> suggestions that he would actually have done better to resist.

Yes, exactly.  I figure if I'm submitting patches to mm, I should defer to
suggestions from someone like Hillf who has committed a lot more of them
than I have. :-)   Arguably the unconditional version is simpler at the
source code level in any case, and I figure more is usually better when it
comes to documenting race conditions, so it didn't seem necessary to push
back.  Frankly I'm happy to keep my sign-off on either version of the patch
and defer to Andrew or whomever as to which one gets taken.

-- 
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/