[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zdy3KRi3mnA2ZaDQ@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 16:07:05 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mm/memfd: refactor memfd_tag_pins() and
memfd_wait_for_pins()
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 03:13:23PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> + xas_for_each(xas, folio, ULONG_MAX) {
> + if (!xa_is_value(folio) && memfd_folio_has_extra_refs(folio))
> xas_set_mark(xas, MEMFD_TAG_PINNED);
.. we decline to tag value entries here ...
> @@ -95,20 +90,15 @@ static int memfd_wait_for_pins(struct address_space *mapping)
>
> xas_set(&xas, 0);
> xas_lock_irq(&xas);
> - xas_for_each_marked(&xas, page, ULONG_MAX, MEMFD_TAG_PINNED) {
> + xas_for_each_marked(&xas, folio, ULONG_MAX, MEMFD_TAG_PINNED) {
> bool clear = true;
>
> - cache_count = 1;
> - if (!xa_is_value(page) &&
> - PageTransHuge(page) && !PageHuge(page))
> - cache_count = HPAGE_PMD_NR;
> -
> - if (!xa_is_value(page) && cache_count !=
> - page_count(page) - total_mapcount(page)) {
> + if (!xa_is_value(folio) &&
> + memfd_folio_has_extra_refs(folio)) {
.. so we don't need to test it here because we'll never see any value
entries. No?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists