From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx202.postini.com [74.125.245.202]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E71236B0082 for ; Thu, 17 May 2012 10:27:23 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 09:27:21 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [RFC] SL[AUO]B common code 5/9] slabs: Common definition for boot state of the slab allocators In-Reply-To: <4FB508EB.4050609@parallels.com> Message-ID: References: <20120514201544.334122849@linux.com> <20120514201611.710540961@linux.com> <4FB36318.30600@parallels.com> <4FB4C71C.6040906@parallels.com> <4FB5065E.8020702@parallels.com> <4FB508EB.4050609@parallels.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Glauber Costa Cc: Pekka Enberg , linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes , Matt Mackall On Thu, 17 May 2012, Glauber Costa wrote: > > > > If for whatever reordering people may decide doing another state is > > > added, or > > > > this function is called later, that will fail > > Then the assumptions that SYSFS is the final state is no longer true and > > therefore the code needs to be inspected if this change affects anything. > > > yes, by humans, that are known to make mistakes. Using >= is a tiny attitude > that protects about failures in this realm. No it risks breakage because the code will run now under a condition when the system has not been brought up fully. -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org