linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: [2.6 patch] the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal
       [not found] <20070102215735.GD20714@stusta.de>
@ 2007-01-04  4:53 ` Nick Piggin
  2007-01-04 15:52   ` Christoph Hellwig
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Nick Piggin @ 2007-01-04  4:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Adrian Bunk; +Cc: Nick Piggin, linux-kernel, Linux Memory Management

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> This patch contains the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>

I guess I don't have a problem with this going into -mm and making its way
upstream sometime after the next release.

I would normally say it is OK to stay for another year because it is so
unintrusive, but I don't like the fact it doesn't give one an explicit ref
on the page -- it could be misused slightly more easily than find_lock_page
or find_get_page.

Anyone object? Otherwise:

Acked-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [2.6 patch] the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal
  2007-01-04  4:53 ` [2.6 patch] the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal Nick Piggin
@ 2007-01-04 15:52   ` Christoph Hellwig
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2007-01-04 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Nick Piggin
  Cc: Adrian Bunk, Nick Piggin, linux-kernel, Linux Memory Management

On Thu, Jan 04, 2007 at 03:53:07PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >This patch contains the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
> 
> I guess I don't have a problem with this going into -mm and making its way
> upstream sometime after the next release.
> 
> I would normally say it is OK to stay for another year because it is so
> unintrusive, but I don't like the fact it doesn't give one an explicit ref
> on the page -- it could be misused slightly more easily than find_lock_page
> or find_get_page.
> 
> Anyone object? Otherwise:

Just kill it.  There's absolutely no point in keeping dead code around.
It's bad enough we keep such things around for half a year.

--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2007-01-04 15:52 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <20070102215735.GD20714@stusta.de>
2007-01-04  4:53 ` [2.6 patch] the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal Nick Piggin
2007-01-04 15:52   ` Christoph Hellwig

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox