Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm: Add optional close() to struct vm_special_mapping

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 19 Aug 2024 at 12:51, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Yes, that appears to fix it for me. I don't have much to say about the
> rest but others might :)

Ok, I did a quick hack-job to remove that disgusting
install_special_mapping() legacy case.

With this, the old "install_special_mapping()" mess no longer exists,
but I haven't even attempted to compile the result, because I don't
have cross-compile environments for any of the affected architectures.

Except UML. I did at least build it there, but it's not like I tested it.

Adding architecture maintainers and more architecture lists to the
participants. It would be good to actually get this patch tested.
Context for newly added people:

   https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wj9QPhG4CjiX8YLRC1wHj_Qs-T8wJi0WEhkfp0cszvB9w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

NOTE! This patch is against my current tree, not the linux-next
changes. But it should entirely remove the case that caused problems
in linux-next.

                      Linus




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux