linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] mm: Generalize putback scan functions

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]

Message-ID: <20190215221335.32zqxhwtcr2kmgku@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Feb 2019 17:13:36 -0500
From:   Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>
To:     Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@...tuozzo.com>
Cc:     Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "mhocko@...e.com" <mhocko@...e.com>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] mm: Generalize putback scan functions

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:01:05PM +0000, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> On 15.02.2019 23:39, Daniel Jordan wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 01:35:37PM +0300, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> >> +static unsigned noinline_for_stack move_pages_to_lru(struct lruvec *lruvec,
> >> +						     struct list_head *list)
> >>  {
> >>  	struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec);
> >> +	int nr_pages, nr_moved = 0;
> >>  	LIST_HEAD(pages_to_free);
> >> +	struct page *page;
> >> +	enum lru_list lru;
> >>  
> >> -	/*
> >> -	 * Put back any unfreeable pages.
> >> -	 */
> >> -	while (!list_empty(page_list)) {
> >> -		struct page *page = lru_to_page(page_list);
> >> -		int lru;
> >> -
> >> +	while (!list_empty(list)) {
> >> +		page = lru_to_page(list);
> >>  		VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageLRU(page), page);
> >> -		list_del(&page->lru);
> >>  		if (unlikely(!page_evictable(page))) {
> >> +			list_del_init(&page->lru);
> > 
> > Why change to list_del_init?  It's more special than list_del but doesn't seem
> > needed since the page is list_add()ed later.
> 
> Not something special is here, I'll remove this _init.
>  
> > That postprocess script from patch 1 seems kinda broken before this series, and
> > still is.  Not that it should block this change.  Out of curiosity did you get
> > it to run?
> 
> I fixed all new warnings, which come with my changes, so the patch does not make
> the script worse.
> 
> If you change all already existing warnings by renaming variables in appropriate
> places, the script will work in some way. But I'm not sure this is enough to get
> results correct, and I have no a big wish to dive into perl to fix warnings
> introduced by another people, so I don't plan to do with this script something else.

Ok, was asking in case I was doing something wrong.

With the above change, for the series, you can add

Reviewed-by: Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>