| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Trivial fix for latent bug in page_alloc.c
On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 23:31 +0000, David Hopwood wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> >>>@@ -251,17 +249,18 @@
> >>> int i;
> >>> struct pfn_info *pg;
> >>>
> >>>- if ( unlikely(order < MIN_ORDER) || unlikely(order > MAX_ORDER) )
> >>>+ ASSERT(order >= 0);
> >>>+ if ( unlikely(order >= MAX_ORDER) )
> >>> return NULL;
> >>
> [...]
> >>Also changing > to >= is wrong.
> >
> > Well, it's consistent with the rest of the patch.
>
> How so? 'order == MAX_ORDER' is possible and valid, unless MAX_ORDER is
> misnamed.
Yes, I erred badly in not using NR_ORDERS, which lead to this
conversation. Nomenclature is important, and I made a hash of it in
this patch. Fortunately, greater minds such as yours spat it out 8)
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver -- Richard Braakman
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home