linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] mm/vmscan: add a comment about MADV_FREE pages check in folio_check_dirty

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: <932f5586-f0d9-4046-1b9d-8da43f86abf8@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Apr 2022 11:15:17 +0800
From:   Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        <songmuchun@...edance.com>, <willy@...radead.org>,
        <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] mm/vmscan: add a comment about MADV_FREE pages
 check in folio_check_dirty_writeback

On 2022/4/11 22:16, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2022 at 05:34:52PM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> The MADV_FREE pages check in folio_check_dirty_writeback is a bit hard to
>> follow. Add a comment to make the code clear.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>  mm/vmscan.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>> index c77d5052f230..4a76be47bed1 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>> @@ -1436,6 +1436,9 @@ static void folio_check_dirty_writeback(struct folio *folio,
>>  	/*
>>  	 * Anonymous pages are not handled by flushers and must be written
>>  	 * from reclaim context. Do not stall reclaim based on them
> 
> While you touch this please add a period at the end of the above
> sentence.

Will do.

> 
> Otherwise looks good:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

Many thanks for review!

> .
>