On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 01:06:56PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 04/13/2017 11:12 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 09:55:37AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> A group of Linux kernel hackers reported chasing a bug that resulted > >> from their assumption that SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU provided an existence > >> guarantee, that is, that no block from such a slab would be reallocated > >> during an RCU read-side critical section. Of course, that is not the > >> case. Instead, SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU only prevents freeing of an entire > >> slab of blocks. > > > > And that while we wrote a huge honking comment right along with it... > > > >> [ paulmck: Add "tombstone" comments as requested by Eric Dumazet. ] > > > > I cannot find any occurrence of "tomb" or "TOMB" in the actual patch, > > confused? > > It's the comments such as: > > + * Note that SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU was originally named SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU. > > so that people who remember the old name can git grep its fate. Exactly! But I must confess that "tombstone" was an excessively obscure word choice, even for native English speakers. I have reworded as follows: [ paulmck: Add comments mentioning the old name, as requested by Eric Dumazet, in order to help people familiar with the old name find the new one. ] Does that help? Thanx, Paul -- 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>
