Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:17d3:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id hz19csp2225859pxb; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 23:51:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx1uv1Z2fhYRtr+TrhzuqULQ3OSM47W8rK87ZfwYaNnyrUgCkyKh68LHaxYxlrADixDta+y X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1186:: with SMTP id n6mr20314461eja.519.1618815109107; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 23:51:49 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1618815109; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ZJU5m0nGgrX7nW027y72hBDmVjRAoQLP2h5M8Hhi3BzToItqUsFCp/XSOiDM80dZV+ JhbIluhRQnJqZ8iLLoN8WRTZsCGfl3L2lIyNC4pSEB6ZMOraxV9yNoMuoOVuqVOY6ZHB V5qxVZ0HhplFV9nDVOC0NIhjMYbsaa7Ppeyw+BbtqRNrYJepAyKN01EmDPvylyoRGvzb AlmqwFdfviuTlpHWYinhPQfC7/Qlz552Mfg2JBekjNBaE9YhDeRytkcW8m1Tkoz/46U0 JeNLG+qd8bbo7FbkZN+dX7nZHw9SGJs3rIla8k7Flk43a2+jtOlCYctvWP6WXatkbLR9 +9NQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject; bh=VJznpGM9YGkN9htzjh9N/g17gN/NqwV+/L+/5VSDmSc=; b=B+dib44K8R/yb0EUE9suXslVO4oqxVNhq4a+6l+BsclSx7k7qxbk3fRAWUXJO/RiNu 2sZRA3+rSVZDNW+T/6pYYre4uMaBQPE+f0T9ev2qDfGrJZmP/DyCv2EGFGyHyKgar9zu E7puKD/2/+z6o5DhCxn21Rg67f+paBIS1tvys+y4aQKMWcuga36hVRzOFeMJBozbIMG7 1SwI+eLKoXpNdm5K/GHXEXfBHOAEGgufM80mx97LlVK4bG3PwE31zbGcP71t04lOkonb Yj4sT+KwcFps2Hk4RntZE5g/LjTa5FsQbtnfleoz+MhgbNQXaaQ+NwzAON8dvwA6tzSh LTFQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e12si11800562edz.568.2021.04.18.23.51.26; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 23:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236743AbhDSGrf (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 19 Apr 2021 02:47:35 -0400 Received: from szxga06-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.32]:17373 "EHLO szxga06-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229671AbhDSGre (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Apr 2021 02:47:34 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS414-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by szxga06-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FNy435WwWzlYyF; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:45:07 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.5] (10.174.178.5) by DGGEMS414-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:59 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mm/swap: remove confusing checking for non_swap_entry() in swap_ra_info() To: "Huang, Ying" CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20210417094039.51711-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <20210417094039.51711-5-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <87v98jkpjt.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: Miaohe Lin Message-ID: <6ea114e9-02bd-b8df-732d-d0c85ff4407c@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:46:58 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87v98jkpjt.fsf@yhuang6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.178.5] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2021/4/19 9:53, Huang, Ying wrote: > Miaohe Lin writes: > >> While we released the pte lock, somebody else might faulted in this pte. >> So we should check whether it's swap pte first to guard against such race >> or swp_type would be unexpected. But the swap_entry isn't used in this >> function and we will have enough checking when we really operate the PTE >> entries later. So checking for non_swap_entry() is not really needed here >> and should be removed to avoid confusion. > > Please rephrase the change log to describe why we have the code and why > it's unnecessary now. You can dig the git history via git-blame to find > out it. > Will try to do it. Thanks. > The patch itself looks good to me. > > Best Regards, > Huang, Ying > >> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin >> --- >> mm/swap_state.c | 6 ------ >> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/swap_state.c b/mm/swap_state.c >> index 272ea2108c9d..df5405384520 100644 >> --- a/mm/swap_state.c >> +++ b/mm/swap_state.c >> @@ -721,7 +721,6 @@ static void swap_ra_info(struct vm_fault *vmf, >> { >> struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma; >> unsigned long ra_val; >> - swp_entry_t entry; >> unsigned long faddr, pfn, fpfn; >> unsigned long start, end; >> pte_t *pte, *orig_pte; >> @@ -739,11 +738,6 @@ static void swap_ra_info(struct vm_fault *vmf, >> >> faddr = vmf->address; >> orig_pte = pte = pte_offset_map(vmf->pmd, faddr); >> - entry = pte_to_swp_entry(*pte); >> - if ((unlikely(non_swap_entry(entry)))) { >> - pte_unmap(orig_pte); >> - return; >> - } >> >> fpfn = PFN_DOWN(faddr); >> ra_val = GET_SWAP_RA_VAL(vma); > . >