[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250508035142.189726-1-gshan@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 13:51:42 +1000
From: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
catalin.marinas@....com,
will@...nel.org,
anshuman.khandual@....com,
ryan.roberts@....com,
gshan@...hat.com,
peterx@...hat.com,
joey.gouly@....com,
yangyicong@...ilicon.com,
shan.gavin@...il.com
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: mm: Drop duplicate check in pmd_trans_huge()
pmd_val(pmd) is inclusive to pmd_present(pmd) since the PMD entry
value isn't zero when pmd_present() returns true. Just drop the
duplicate check done by pmd_val(pmd).
No functional changes intended.
Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
---
Found this by code inspection
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
index d3b538be1500..2599b9b8666f 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
@@ -739,8 +739,7 @@ static inline int pmd_trans_huge(pmd_t pmd)
* If pmd is present-invalid, pmd_table() won't detect it
* as a table, so force the valid bit for the comparison.
*/
- return pmd_val(pmd) && pmd_present(pmd) &&
- !pmd_table(__pmd(pmd_val(pmd) | PTE_VALID));
+ return pmd_present(pmd) && !pmd_table(__pmd(pmd_val(pmd) | PTE_VALID));
}
#endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */
--
2.49.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists