Re: Possibly bug in radix_tree_delete, and fix.

On Thursday February 16, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> It should be basically an identical block to the one below in the main
> loop, yeah? You're missing the nr_cleared_tags bit.
> 
> Something like:
> 
>     tags[tag] = 1;
>     if (tag_get(pathp->node, tag, pathp->offset)) {
>        tag_clear(pathp->node, tag, pathp->offset);
>        if (!any_tag_set(pathp->node, tag)) {
>           tags[tag] = 0;
>           nr_cleared_tags++;
>        }
>     }
> 
> And you can add an
> Acked-by: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

Yes, that's clearly better.  I've sent the revised patch out.

Thanks,
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Possibly bug in radix_tree_delete, and fix.
    • From: Neil Brown <[email protected]>
  • Re: Possibly bug in radix_tree_delete, and fix.
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: error during kernel compilation for xilinx ml300 specific kernel
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Provide an interface for getting the current tick length
• Previous by thread: Re: Possibly bug in radix_tree_delete, and fix.
• Next by thread: Re: Possibly bug in radix_tree_delete, and fix.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]