linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] mm/compaction: factor out code to test if we should run compaction for target order

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:45:03 +0800
From:   Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@...weicloud.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, david@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] mm/compaction: factor out code to test if we
 should run compaction for target order



on 8/29/2023 11:54 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 11:36:17PM +0800, Kemeng Shi wrote:
>> +		if (compaction_suit_allocation_order(zone,
>> +				pgdat->kcompactd_max_order,
>> +				highest_zoneidx, ALLOC_WMARK_MIN) ==
>> +				COMPACT_CONTINUE)
> 
> The indentation is confusing here.  It looks like COMPACT_CONTINUE is
> an argument of compaction_suit_allocation_order().  How about:
> 
> 		ret = compaction_suit_allocation_order(zone,
> 				pgdat->kcompactd_max_order,
> 				highest_zoneidx, ALLOC_WMARK_MIN);
> 		if (ret == COMPACT_CONTINUE)
> 
Thanks for information, I will fix it this way in next version.
> (assuming there's a handy variable called ret)
> 
> You could also distinguih it by indenting COMPACT_CONTINUE by an
> extra tab, but I think it's worth an extra variable just because this is
> such a long line>
>> +		if (compaction_suit_allocation_order(zone,
>> +				cc.order, zoneid, ALLOC_WMARK_MIN) !=
>> +				COMPACT_CONTINUE)
>>  			continue;
> 
> Same here.
>