[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <16da59ae2623bda296bfd7a8c3b0f5e4ddc2a608.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2025 08:56:40 +0100
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Sauerwein, David"
<dssauerw@...zon.de>, Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>, Ard
Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Mark
Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, Will
Deacon <will@...nel.org>, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/7] mm: Implement for_each_valid_pfn() for
CONFIG_FLATMEM
On Mon, 2025-04-07 at 09:54 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> el.h b/include/asm-generic/memory_model.h
> > index a3b5029aebbd..044536da3390 100644
> > --- a/include/asm-generic/memory_model.h
> > +++ b/include/asm-generic/memory_model.h
> > @@ -30,7 +30,31 @@ static inline int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)
> > return pfn >= pfn_offset && (pfn - pfn_offset) <
> > max_mapnr;
> > }
> > #define pfn_valid pfn_valid
> > -#endif
> > +
> > +static inline bool first_valid_pfn(unsigned long *pfn)
>
> This is now different from SPARSEMEM version. Do we need it at all?
Er, no. I think it's left over from the first implementation, before I
realised I could put it all into the loop and didn't need a helper at
all. I'll remove it.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5069 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists