On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 21 Dec 2010, Minchan Kim wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > You'll need to merge all patches into one, otherwise you create really >> > nasty memory leaks when bisecting between them. >> > >> >> Okay. I will resend. >> >> Thanks for the notice, Christoph. > > Good point from hch, but I feel even more strongly: if you're going to > do this now, please rename remove_from_page_cache (delete_from_page_cache > was what I chose back when I misdid it) - you're changing an EXPORTed > function in a subtle (well, subtlish) confusing way, which could easily > waste people's time down the line, whether in not-yet-in-tree filesystems > or backports of fixes. I'd much rather you break someone's build, > forcing them to look at what changed, than crash or leak at runtime. > > If you do rename, you can keep your patch structure, introducing the > new function as a wrapper to the old at the beginning, then removing > the old function at the end. It is very good idea!! Thanks for good suggestion, Hugh. > > (As you know, I do agree that it's right to decrement the reference > count at the point of removing from page cache.) > > Hugh > -- Kind regards, Minchan Kim -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href