[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <D3WS3TK054QR.580Q46WYCDEZ@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2024 19:10:34 +0300
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Shuai Xue" <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>, <bp@...en8.de>,
<rafael@...nel.org>, <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>,
<mawupeng1@...wei.com>, <tony.luck@...el.com>, <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
<naoya.horiguchi@....com>, <james.morse@....com>, <tongtiangen@...wei.com>,
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <will@...nel.org>
Cc: <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>, <justin.he@....com>,
<ardb@...nel.org>, <ying.huang@...el.com>, <ashish.kalra@....com>,
<baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <lenb@...nel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>,
<robert.moore@...el.com>, <lvying6@...wei.com>, <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>,
<zhuo.song@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 2/3] mm: memory-failure: move return value
documentation to function declaration
On Mon Sep 2, 2024 at 6:00 AM EEST, Shuai Xue wrote:
> Part of return value comments for memory_failure() were originally
> documented at the call site. Move those comments to the function
> declaration to improve code readability and to provide developers with
> immediate access to function usage and return information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c | 7 -------
> mm/memory-failure.c | 9 ++++++---
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c
> index b85ec7a4ec9e..66693b6dd1cd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mce/core.c
> @@ -1361,13 +1361,6 @@ static void kill_me_maybe(struct callback_head *cb)
> return;
> }
>
> - /*
> - * -EHWPOISON from memory_failure() means that it already sent SIGBUS
> - * to the current process with the proper error info,
> - * -EOPNOTSUPP means hwpoison_filter() filtered the error event,
> - *
> - * In both cases, no further processing is required.
> - */
> if (ret == -EHWPOISON || ret == -EOPNOTSUPP)
> return;
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 7066fc84f351..df26e2ff5e06 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -2199,9 +2199,12 @@ static void kill_procs_now(struct page *p, unsigned long pfn, int flags,
> * Must run in process context (e.g. a work queue) with interrupts
> * enabled and no spinlocks held.
> *
> - * Return: 0 for successfully handled the memory error,
> - * -EOPNOTSUPP for hwpoison_filter() filtered the error event,
> - * < 0(except -EOPNOTSUPP) on failure.
> + * Return values:
s/Return values/Return:/
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt
> + * 0 - success,
> + * -EOPNOTSUPP - hwpoison_filter() filtered the error event,
> + * -EHWPOISON - the page was already poisoned, potentially
> + * kill process,
> + * other negative values - failure.
> */
> int memory_failure(unsigned long pfn, int flags)
> {
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists