[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <mafs0sehvwfy0.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2025 14:42:47 +0200
From: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>
To: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@...gle.com>
Cc: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>, pratyush@...nel.org,
jasonmiu@...gle.com, graf@...zon.com, changyuanl@...gle.com,
rppt@...nel.org, dmatlack@...gle.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
corbet@....net, rdunlap@...radead.org, ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com,
kanie@...ux.alibaba.com, ojeda@...nel.org, aliceryhl@...gle.com,
masahiroy@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tj@...nel.org,
yoann.congal@...le.fr, mmaurer@...gle.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
chenridong@...wei.com, axboe@...nel.dk, mark.rutland@....com,
jannh@...gle.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, hannes@...xchg.org,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, david@...hat.com, joel.granados@...nel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, anna.schumaker@...cle.com, song@...nel.org,
zhangguopeng@...inos.cn, linux@...ssschuh.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, rafael@...nel.org, dakr@...nel.org,
bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
myungjoo.ham@...sung.com, yesanishhere@...il.com,
Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com,
aleksander.lobakin@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, leon@...nel.org, lukas@...ner.de,
bhelgaas@...gle.com, wagi@...nel.org, djeffery@...hat.com,
stuart.w.hayes@...il.com, lennart@...ttering.net, brauner@...nel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
saeedm@...dia.com, ajayachandra@...dia.com, jgg@...dia.com,
parav@...dia.com, leonro@...dia.com, witu@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 26/30] mm: shmem: use SHMEM_F_* flags instead of VM_*
flags
On Mon, Aug 11 2025, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> On 2025-08-07 01:44:32, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
>> From: Pratyush Yadav <ptyadav@...zon.de>
>> @@ -3123,7 +3123,9 @@ static struct inode *__shmem_get_inode(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
>> spin_lock_init(&info->lock);
>> atomic_set(&info->stop_eviction, 0);
>> info->seals = F_SEAL_SEAL;
>> - info->flags = flags & VM_NORESERVE;
>> + info->flags = 0;
>
> This is not needed as the 'info' is being set to 0 just above
> spin_lock_init.
>
>> + if (flags & VM_NORESERVE)
>> + info->flags |= SHMEM_F_NORESERVE;
>
> As info->flags will be 0, this can be just direct assignment '='.
I think it is a bit more readable this way.
Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion, so if you insist, I'll change
this.
>
>> info->i_crtime = inode_get_mtime(inode);
>> info->fsflags = (dir == NULL) ? 0 :
>> SHMEM_I(dir)->fsflags & SHMEM_FL_INHERITED;
>> @@ -5862,8 +5864,10 @@ static inline struct inode *shmem_get_inode(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
>> /* common code */
>>
>> static struct file *__shmem_file_setup(struct vfsmount *mnt, const char *name,
>> - loff_t size, unsigned long flags, unsigned int i_flags)
>> + loff_t size, unsigned long vm_flags,
>> + unsigned int i_flags)
>
> Nit: Might be just my editor, but this alignment seems off.
Looks fine for me:
https://gist.github.com/prati0100/a06229ca99cac5aae795fb962bb24ac5
Checkpatch also doesn't complain. Can you double-check? And if it still
looks off, can you describe what's wrong?
>
>> {
>> + unsigned long flags = (vm_flags & VM_NORESERVE) ? SHMEM_F_NORESERVE : 0;
>> struct inode *inode;
>> struct file *res;
>>
>> @@ -5880,7 +5884,7 @@ static struct file *__shmem_file_setup(struct vfsmount *mnt, const char *name,
>> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>
>> inode = shmem_get_inode(&nop_mnt_idmap, mnt->mnt_sb, NULL,
>> - S_IFREG | S_IRWXUGO, 0, flags);
>> + S_IFREG | S_IRWXUGO, 0, vm_flags);
>> if (IS_ERR(inode)) {
>> shmem_unacct_size(flags, size);
>> return ERR_CAST(inode);
>> --
>> 2.50.1.565.gc32cd1483b-goog
>>
--
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav
Powered by blists - more mailing lists