From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 15:52:38 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] the scheduled find_trylock_page() removal Message-ID: <20070104155238.GA5648@infradead.org> References: <20070102215735.GD20714@stusta.de> <459C8833.7080500@yahoo.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <459C8833.7080500@yahoo.com.au> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Adrian Bunk , Nick Piggin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linux Memory Management List-ID: 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 > > 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: email@kvack.org