On Tuesday 09 October 2007 03:04, Andrew Morton wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 19:45:08 +0800 "Yan Zheng" <yanzheng@21cn.com> wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > The test for VM_CAN_NONLINEAR always fails
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yan Zheng<yanzheng@21cn.com>
> > ----
> > diff -ur linux-2.6.23-rc9/mm/fremap.c linux/mm/fremap.c
> > --- linux-2.6.23-rc9/mm/fremap.c	2007-10-07 15:03:33.000000000 +0800
> > +++ linux/mm/fremap.c	2007-10-08 19:33:44.000000000 +0800
> > @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@
> >  	if (vma->vm_private_data && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_NONLINEAR))
> >  		goto out;
> >
> > -	if (!vma->vm_flags & VM_CAN_NONLINEAR)
> > +	if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_CAN_NONLINEAR))
> >  		goto out;
> >
> >  	if (end <= start || start < vma->vm_start || end > vma->vm_end)
>
> Lovely.  From this we can deduce that nobody has run remap_file_pages()
> since 2.6.23-rc1 and that nobody (including the developer who made that
> change) ran it while that change was in -mm.

But you'd be wrong. remap_file_pages was tested both with my own tester
and Ingo's test program.

vm_flags != 0, !vm_flags = 0, 0 & x = 0, so the test always falls
through. Of course, what I _should_ have done is also test a driver which
does not have VM_CAN_NONLINEAR... but even I wouldn't rewrite half
the nonlinear mapping code without once testing it ;)

FWIW, Oracle (maybe the sole real user of this) has been testing it, which
I'm very happy about (rather than testing after 2.6.23 is released).
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/