[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BL1PR11MB5271A6FA21418DD8486089AB8C08A@BL1PR11MB5271.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 08:17:23 +0000
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "Robin
Murphy" <robin.murphy@....com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Vasant Hegde
<vasant.hegde@....com>, "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>, "Alistair
Popple" <apopple@...dia.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Jean-Philippe Brucker
<jean-philippe@...aro.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, "Lai, Yi1"
<yi1.lai@...el.com>, "iommu@...ts.linux.dev" <iommu@...ts.linux.dev>,
"security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 6/8] mm: Introduce deferred freeing for kernel page
tables
> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 6, 2025 2:44 AM
>
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 01:51:01PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
>
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(pt, next, &page_list, pt_list) {
> > + list_del(&pt->pt_list);
>
> The list_del isn't necessary, it doesn't zero the list, just _safe
> iteration is fine.
>
if no list_del why need to keep the _safe iteration?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists