[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9da3c6ef-ba0d-6229-2188-0956222b04f1@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 09:05:59 +0530
From: Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Tim C Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hesham Almatary <hesham.almatary@...wei.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@...ux.ibm.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/13] mm/demotion: Return error on write to
numa_demotion sysfs
On 6/13/22 8:56 AM, Ying Huang wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 19:22 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> With CONFIG_MIGRATION disabled return EINVAL on write.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> mm/memory-tiers.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory-tiers.c b/mm/memory-tiers.c
>> index 9c6b40d7e0bf..c3123a457d90 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory-tiers.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory-tiers.c
>> @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ static ssize_t numa_demotion_enabled_store(struct kobject *kobj,
>> {
>> ssize_t ret;
>>
>>
>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MIGRATION))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>
> How about enclose numa_demotion_enabled_xxx related code with CONFIG_MIGRATION?
>
IIUC there is a desire to use IS_ENABLED() in the kernel instead of
#ifdef since that helps in more compile time checks. Because there are
no dead codes during compile now with IS_ENABLED().
W.r.t leaving the sysfs file visible even when CONFIG_MIGRATION is
disabled, I was thinking it gives better visibility into numa_demotion
status. I could switch to hide numa_demotion file if that is desirable.
>> ret = kstrtobool(buf, &numa_demotion_enabled);
>> if (ret)
>> return ret;
>
-aneesh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists