[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1

To: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
Subject: Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1
From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2002 07:10:22 +0200
Cc: Craig Kulesa <ckulesa@as.arizona.edu>, linux-mm@kvack.org,Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>, Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org>
Fake-Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
In-Reply-To: <1031546187.15794.19.camel@phantasy>
Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mm-archive@humbolt.geo.uu.nl
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0209052032410.30628-100000@loke.as.arizona.edu> <E17oGD4-0006lm-00@starship> <1031546187.15794.19.camel@phantasy>
Sender: Rik van Riel <riel@nl.linux.org>

On Monday 09 September 2002 06:36, Robert Love wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-09-08 at 17:43, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> 
> > - 		if (unlikely((condition)!=0)) BUG(); \
> > + 		if (unlikely(condition)) BUG(); \
> 
> Then send in a patch; the code I pasted was the current 2.5 BUG_ON (and
> 2.4's, since I copied it from 2.5 when I sent the patch). ;-)

Actually, I dimly recall there was a reason for that awkward looking
construct, in which case the bug is a documentation bug.  Anybody
remember?

-- 
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/

References:
- Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1
  - From: Craig Kulesa <ckulesa@as.arizona.edu>
- Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1
  - From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>
- Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1
  - From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH][RFC] slabnow
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH][RFC] slabnow
Prev by thread: Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1
Next by thread: Re: slablru for 2.5.32-mm1
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread