Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759524AbaD3VBA (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:01:00 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:50328 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759165AbaD3VA7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:00:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:00:57 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Rik van Riel Cc: Michal Hocko , Masayoshi Mizuma , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, sandeen@redhat.com, jweiner@redhat.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com, mpatlasov@parallels.com, Motohiro.Kosaki@us.fujitsu.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] mm,writeback: fix divide by zero in pos_ratio_polynom Message-Id: <20140430140057.7d2a6e984b2ec987182d2a4e@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20140430164255.7a753a8e@cuia.bos.redhat.com> References: <20140429151910.53f740ef@annuminas.surriel.com> <5360C9E7.6010701@jp.fujitsu.com> <20140430093035.7e7226f2@annuminas.surriel.com> <20140430134826.GH4357@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20140430104114.4bdc588e@cuia.bos.redhat.com> <20140430120001.b4b95061ac7252a976b8a179@linux-foundation.org> <53614F3C.8020009@redhat.com> <20140430123526.bc6a229c1ea4addad1fb483d@linux-foundation.org> <20140430160218.442863e0@cuia.bos.redhat.com> <20140430131353.fa9f49604ea39425bc93c24a@linux-foundation.org> <20140430164255.7a753a8e@cuia.bos.redhat.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.2.0beta5 (GTK+ 2.24.10; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 16:42:55 -0400 Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:13:53 -0700 > Andrew Morton wrote: > > > This was a consequence of 64->32 truncation and it can't happen any > > more, can it? > > Andrew, this is cleaner indeed :) I'm starting to get worried about 32-bit wraparound in the patch version number ;) > Masayoshi-san, does the bug still happen with this version, or does > this fix the problem? > We could put something like if (WARN_ON_ONCE(setpoint == limit)) setpoint--; in there if we're not sure. But it's better to be sure! -- 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/