[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210323154321.GG6486@xz-x1>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 11:43:21 -0400
From: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/23] mm: Introduce zap_details.zap_flags
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 02:11:29AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 08:48:56PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> > +/* Whether to check page->mapping when zapping */
> > +#define ZAP_FLAG_CHECK_MAPPING BIT(0)
> > +
> > /*
> > * Parameter block passed down to zap_pte_range in exceptional cases.
> > */
> > struct zap_details {
> > - struct address_space *check_mapping; /* Check page->mapping if set */
> > + struct address_space *zap_mapping; /* Check page->mapping if set */
>
> Now the comment is wrong. It used to mean "If this is NULL, zap pages
> with any mapping", but now it's always set, and the decision about whether
> to check the mapping is in the flag.
>
> Honestly, I'd remove the comments from both these members. They don't add
> anything to understandability now.
Agreed, I'm removing them. Thanks,
--
Peter Xu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists