[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1521dc0e-e9f8-d10f-e213-1b1552eb03fa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 18:44:00 +0200
From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>, mhocko@...nel.org,
aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mpe@...erman.id.au, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <albert@...ive.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: remove odd HAVE_PTE_SPECIAL
On 10/04/2018 17:58, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 10/04/18 16:25, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> Remove the additional define HAVE_PTE_SPECIAL and rely directly on
>> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL.
>>
>> There is no functional change introduced by this patch
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> mm/memory.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
>> index 96910c625daa..53b6344a90d2 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory.c
>> @@ -817,19 +817,13 @@ static void print_bad_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> unsigned long addr,
>> * PFNMAP mappings in order to support COWable mappings.
>> *
>> */
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL
>> -# define HAVE_PTE_SPECIAL 1
>> -#else
>> -# define HAVE_PTE_SPECIAL 0
>> -#endif
>> struct page *_vm_normal_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
>> pte_t pte, bool with_public_device)
>> {
>> unsigned long pfn = pte_pfn(pte);
>> - if (HAVE_PTE_SPECIAL) {
>> - if (likely(!pte_special(pte)))
>> - goto check_pfn;
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL
>
> Nit: Couldn't you use IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL) within the
> existing code structure to avoid having to add these #ifdefs?
I agree, that would be better. I didn't thought about this option..
Thanks for reporting this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists