On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 08:39:39AM -0700, Matt Gerassimoff wrote: > >>But without that code, everything works 100%. I'm not sure what all the > >>remap_area_sections() > >>code does, but the cleanup definitely does not work, as the kernel OOPS > >>will testify. > >>There may be a better solution, but as far as I can tell, it's not > >>really > >>needed. Maybe > >>someone else will disagree. > > > >We might as well rip this code out then. I'm all for simpler code, but > >I'm > >sure the folk who want to squeeze the best performance out of their > >machines > >will quickly squeel if I did that. > > > >And what cleanup are you referring to? > > I meant freeing, not cleanup. Sorry. Okay, I won't include that bug fix with the fix I'm going to be working on, even though it's clearly a bug in its own right. After all, it "definitely does not work" in your words. (It may not fix the problem _you're_ seeing, but I assure you, that code as it stands is wrong.) > As I said it's a start. I'm all for performance but not at the expense > of integrity. Right now the code doesn't work and needs to be fixed. Yes, I think everyone realises that there is a bug here which needs fixing. Unfortunately, vague "it fails" bug reports are utterly useless for finding bugs. Your report provided that extra bit of information which points to where the real problem lies. Now, I could be looking at finishing off what I'm currently working on so I can move on to fixing it instead of writing this message in reply to an obvious statement. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
