[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f0e1cf94-1579-4be4-801f-ed1fb48b98ed@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 15:48:22 +0530
From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>,
Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@...il.com>, Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@...com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul@...com>, Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>,
Ying Huang <ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>, Pedro Falcato <pfalcato@...e.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@...cle.com>,
Lance Yang <ioworker0@...il.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm: smaller folio_pte_batch() improvements
On 02/07/25 4:19 pm, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Let's clean up a bit:
>
> (1) No need for start_ptep vs. ptep anymore, we can simply use ptep.
>
> (2) Let's switch to "unsigned int" for everything. Negative values do
> not make sense.
>
> (3) We can simplify the code by leaving the pte unchanged after the
> pte_same() check.
>
> (4) Clarify that we should never exceed a single VMA; it indicates a
> problem in the caller.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Reviewed-by: Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>
> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
> Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
>
Reviewed-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists