[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151214175509.GA25681@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:55:09 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com,
mhocko@...e.com, kwapulinski.piotr@...il.com, aarcange@...hat.com,
dcashman@...gle.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: change find_vma() function
On 12/14, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 07:02:25PM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> > change find_vma() to break ealier when found the adderss
> > is not in any vma, don't need loop to search all vma.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@...il.com>
> > ---
> > mm/mmap.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> > index b513f20..8294c9b 100644
> > --- a/mm/mmap.c
> > +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> > @@ -2064,6 +2064,9 @@ struct vm_area_struct *find_vma(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
> > vma = tmp;
> > if (tmp->vm_start <= addr)
> > break;
> > + if (!tmp->vm_prev || tmp->vm_prev->vm_end <= addr)
> > + break;
> > +
>
> This 'break' would return 'tmp' as found vma.
But this would be right?
Not that I think this optimization makes sense, I simply do not know,
but to me this change looks technically correct at first glance...
But the changelog is wrong or I missed something. This change can stop
the main loop earlier; if "tmp" is the first vma, or if the previous one
is below the address. Or perhaps I just misread that "not in any vma"
note in the changelog.
No?
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists