On Mon 06-02-17 06:26:41, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 03:07:13PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > While we are at it also make sure that the radix tree doesn't > > accidentaly override tags stored in the upper part of the gfp_mask. > > > diff --git a/lib/radix-tree.c b/lib/radix-tree.c > > index 9dc093d5ef39..7550be09f9d6 100644 > > --- a/lib/radix-tree.c > > +++ b/lib/radix-tree.c > > @@ -2274,6 +2274,8 @@ static int radix_tree_cpu_dead(unsigned int cpu) > > void __init radix_tree_init(void) > > { > > int ret; > > + > > + BUILD_BUG_ON(RADIX_TREE_MAX_TAGS + __GFP_BITS_SHIFT > 32); > > radix_tree_node_cachep = kmem_cache_create("radix_tree_node", > > sizeof(struct radix_tree_node), 0, > > SLAB_PANIC | SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT, > > That's going to have a conceptual conflict with some patches I have > in flight. I'll take this part through my radix tree patch collection. This part is not needed for the patch, strictly speaking but I wanted to make the code more future proof. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx"> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>