All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@techadventures.net>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com,
	dan.j.williams@intel.com, jglisse@redhat.com, rafael@kernel.org,
	yasu.isimatu@gmail.com, logang@deltatee.com,
	dave.jiang@intel.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com,
	vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Drop mem_blk check from unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 11:36:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180814093652.GA6878@techadventures.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82148bc6-672d-6610-757f-d910a17d23c6@redhat.com>

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 11:30:51AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:

> 
> While it is correct in current code, I wonder if this sanity check
> should stay. I would completely agree if it would be a static function.

Hi David,

Well, unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() __only__ gets called from remove_memory_section().
But remove_memory_section() only calls unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() IFF mem_blk
is not NULL:

static int remove_memory_section
{
	...
	mem = find_memory_block(section);
	if (!mem)
		goto out_unlock;

	unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(mem, __section_nr(section));
	...
}

So, to me keeping the check is redundant, as we already check for it before calling in.

Thanks
-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3

  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-14  9:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-13 15:46 [PATCH v2 0/3] Refactoring for remove_memory_section/unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes osalvador
2018-08-13 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] mm/memory-hotplug: Drop unused args from remove_memory_section osalvador
2018-08-14  9:29   ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-13 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Drop mem_blk check from unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes osalvador
2018-08-14  9:30   ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-14  9:36     ` Oscar Salvador [this message]
2018-08-14  9:44       ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-14 10:06         ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-14 10:09           ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-14 12:36             ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-13 15:46 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Refactor unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes osalvador
2018-08-14  9:39   ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-14  9:55     ` Oscar Salvador

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180814093652.GA6878@techadventures.net \
    --to=osalvador@techadventures.net \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=logang@deltatee.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=yasu.isimatu@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.