Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-66413-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 09:22:39 +0100
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/7] lib/stackdepot: Move stack_record struct
 definition into the header
Message-ID: <Zc3Jz_eJaZ8MdnWV@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20240214170157.17530-1-osalvador@suse.de>
 <20240214170157.17530-3-osalvador@suse.de>
 <CANpmjNPypJM5icG9M5yP5-psSofbA7D35eaKx+E6NyCsHMa=qg@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANpmjNPypJM5icG9M5yP5-psSofbA7D35eaKx+E6NyCsHMa=qg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 09:16:58AM +0100, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 18:00, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> wrote:
> > -/* The pool_index is offset by 1 so the first record does not have a 0 handle. */
> > +/* The pool_index is offset by 1 so the first record does not have a 0 handle */
> 
> Why this comment change? We lost the '.' -- for future reference, it'd
> be good to ensure unnecessary changes don't creep into the diff. This
> is just nitpicking, and I've already reviewed this change, so no need
> to send a v+1.

Right, this was an oversight.

Andrew, please fold the following into the patch, thanks:

diff --git a/lib/stackdepot.c b/lib/stackdepot.c
index 4a661a6777da..514b8d40ff57 100644
--- a/lib/stackdepot.c
+++ b/lib/stackdepot.c
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
 #include <linux/kasan-enabled.h>

 #define DEPOT_POOLS_CAP 8192
-/* The pool_index is offset by 1 so the first record does not have a 0 handle */
+/* The pool_index is offset by 1 so the first record does not have a 0 handle. */
 #define DEPOT_MAX_POOLS \
 	(((1LL << (DEPOT_POOL_INDEX_BITS)) - 1 < DEPOT_POOLS_CAP) ? \
 	 (1LL << (DEPOT_POOL_INDEX_BITS)) - 1 : DEPOT_POOLS_CAP)

-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE Labs