| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <c3c638fb-e61f-47c1-860c-0cc024961fe4@kylinos.cn> Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 09:33:04 +0800 From: liuye <liuye@...inos.cn> To: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com> Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hch@...radead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Optimize __vmalloc_node_range_noprof function. 在 2025/3/4 13:58, Dev Jain 写道: > > > On 03/03/25 9:39 pm, Uladzislau Rezki wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 05:44:06PM +0800, Liu Ye wrote: >>> The use of variables real_size and real_align in function >>> __vmalloc_node_range_noprof is unreadable. Optimize it in four patches. >>> >>> Liu Ye (4): >>> mm/vmalloc: Remove unnecessary size ALIGN in >>> __vmalloc_node_range_noprof >>> mm/vmalloc: Size should be used instead of real_size in >>> __vmalloc_node_range_noprof >>> mm/vmalloc: Remove the real_size variable to simplify the code in >>> __vmalloc_node_range_noprof >>> mm/vmalloc: Rename the variable real_align to original_align to >>> prevent misunderstanding >>> >>> mm/vmalloc.c | 20 ++++++++------------ >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >>> >>> -- >> Let me double check it. Quick question, this series does not >> introduce any functional change? > > Yeah, the cover letter subject is misleading. IMHO it should be more like "Refactor" instead of "Optimize". Yes, refactoring is more accurate, regarding real_size and real_align. >> >> -- >> Uladzislau Rezki >> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists