linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v9 06/14] mm/gup: migrate device coherent pages when pinning instead of failing

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 10:40:55 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Alex Sierra <alex.sierra@....com>, jgg@...dia.com,
        Felix.Kuehling@....com, linux-mm@...ck.org, rcampbell@...dia.com,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        hch@....de, jglisse@...hat.com, apopple@...dia.com,
        willy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 06/14] mm/gup: migrate device coherent pages when
 pinning instead of failing

On 18.07.22 22:32, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 12:56:29 +0200 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
>>>  		/*
>>>  		 * Try to move out any movable page before pinning the range.
>>>  		 */
>>> @@ -1919,7 +1948,8 @@ static long check_and_migrate_movable_pages(unsigned long nr_pages,
>>>  				    folio_nr_pages(folio));
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>> -	if (!list_empty(&movable_page_list) || isolation_error_count)
>>> +	if (!list_empty(&movable_page_list) || isolation_error_count
>>> +		|| coherent_pages)
>>
>> The common style is to
>>
>> a) add the || to the end of the previous line
>> b) indent such the we have a nice-to-read alignment
>>
>> if (!list_empty(&movable_page_list) || isolation_error_count ||
>>     coherent_pages)
>>
> 
> I missed that.  This series is now in mm-stable so any fix will need to
> be a standalone followup patch, please.
> 
>> Apart from that lgtm.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> 
> And your reviewed-by's will be lost.  Stupid git.

I know, I already raised my concerns regarding the new workflow, so I
won't repeat that. I can understand (too some degree) that we don't want
code to change just before the new merge window opens.

But I do wonder if we really don't even want to do subject+description
updates. Sure, the commit IDs will change. Who cares?

Anyhow, it is what it is.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb