linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] filemap: Correct the conditions for marking a folio as accessed

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: <YrAS2+hjH19LA73A@infradead.org>
Date:   Sun, 19 Jun 2022 23:25:31 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>,
        Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] filemap: Correct the conditions for marking a folio
 as accessed

On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 04:11:41PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> +static inline bool pos_same_folio(loff_t pos1, loff_t pos2, struct folio *folio)
>
> +{
> +	unsigned int shift = folio_shift(folio);
> +
> +	return (pos1 >> shift == pos2 >> shift);
> +}

The calling convention with the folio as the last argument seems a bit
odd to me. But then again so does passing just one folio for checking
if something is in the same folio.   But as I can't come up with
something better I'll just deposit these mumblings here insted of
actually complaining.