On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 09:52:01PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I see your wide terminal and raise you a complete rewrite of that
> function. Sigh, why did I assume the old code was the right way to do
> it?
That's a mostly wrong assumption, as experience proves.
> Hah¸ we both missed it. This is wrong. (Fix your backport!)
Yikes:
alloc_size = size * LDT_ENTRY_SIZE;
But hey, I made you spot it, still! :-)
Done.
> I'm not sure this is correct, so I changed it to something obviously
> correct (kmalloc/kfree).
Someone thought she won't get contiguous memory from kmalloc(). But how
big can alloc_size be to fail...
> You read too many of Linus' comments about using wider terminals :)
Nah, I'm just trying to put back some sanity in that 80 cols rule which,
even you, think is a hard one. And I say, keep 80 cols but sanity can
override it if what 80 cols produces, is crap.
I trust you're sane enough to apply that and not think C++ or java
wankery. Woahahahah...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html