linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/14] md/raid1: use folio for tmppage

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <151dd7eb-4dd0-9183-41eb-d54dfaea3285@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 17:07:41 +0800
From: Li Nan <linan666@...weicloud.com>
To: yukuai@...as.com, Li Nan <linan666@...weicloud.com>, song@...nel.org
Cc: xni@...hat.com, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 yangerkun@...wei.com, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/14] md/raid1: use folio for tmppage



在 2026/2/5 15:33, Yu Kuai 写道:
> Hi,
> 
> 在 2026/2/5 15:23, Li Nan 写道:
>> Yeah, should we introduce safe_put_folio()? Or just check NULL here.
> 
> Yes, and don't copy implementation. Just convert safe_put_page(page) to
> safe_put_folio(page_folio(page)) first.
> 

page cannot be NULL in page_folio(), and the code would be:

if (page)
   safe_put_folio(page_folio(page))

This also looks odd. Keeping both functions and removing the page one
after the last reference to it in RAID5 is removed seems better. What do
you think?

-- 
Thanks,
Nan