From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 269F73FAE13 for ; Fri, 15 May 2026 11:36:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778844975; cv=none; b=UVp6/Xd/2WL+hgOh2EdBiATJvFPHw5d9j4PlpXTJhs4YzpGHslsnQNDJS7GDtVLqASFGuWLSVefNGBH6COl62Ubfg2sSP4t/eS/OE/sFSD4Ryn5v9Wrib1crrz83Usf/X2Wzb+X6+2aw4dsrcHb82qSvWfn3UUNBPalkl9YN23k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778844975; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fpmX7i/2n7TdRNKJMWKe8p1y7hQIc9tuTqTKByIO/BQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RUaZgCf0+r2GVqMMeJTi2Ln9GE6xKF+lsi5Hy25N7HMEI8I5+/npUZnR/v6yY8SQCEqiPMSB8uQJUAMHZbRjuxJpERYJA9eODs9G3lK0M02zSy4XnFdjfWEzBb3SMCv+hJrf+CiBknSld4msbOX94fSVFjRioDZ4ETykgctU2p4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=rj+xmIGM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="rj+xmIGM" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2E4CDC2BCB0; Fri, 15 May 2026 11:36:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1778844974; bh=fpmX7i/2n7TdRNKJMWKe8p1y7hQIc9tuTqTKByIO/BQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=rj+xmIGMjzlDWh0IxoCnDOYMIH0F30W9EiLzViLa2qvwgjUXdNlndaYRBThYVelwf IiIJVzgMUgt71fsVxj7TVWuka608WaiPDsLpIMsCQ5kiEYFWSBObT+pcfjfMfEPJ3k MyTHm1hD8h15MhpZ/hkCMycRF54tQKazQerA34chvGVNgRYJr+bUPA/PlIK0I65o8I lhLzeiYKlv8L/7px58M98rSBpwXmzaXNPsM5AMg+gMFTsuiuPqWfzZIptyIjvWhPHa vuftc5g5DEnOFZZNDsxoJTy8AUvnrV+V0MFqHoELqY1D3b/AL0JNKigolj5HJPbK/m ge+NhZ2i9k2XA== Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 12:36:10 +0100 From: Lorenzo Stoakes To: ranxiaokai627@163.com Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, hughd@google.com, leitao@debian.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, ran.xiaokai@zte.com.cn Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: huge_memory: refactor thpsize_shmem_enabled_show() with helper arrays Message-ID: References: <20260515060441.53094-1-ranxiaokai627@163.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260515060441.53094-1-ranxiaokai627@163.com> On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 06:04:41AM +0000, ranxiaokai627@163.com wrote: > >(As I said in the 1/2) > > > >Please don't send 2/2 in response to 1/2, and use a cover letter if you send > >more than 1 patch! > > Thanks for the guidance. > I will do that in the next verison. > > >On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 09:45:08AM +0000, ranxiaokai627@163.com wrote: > >> From: Ran Xiaokai > >> > >> Replace the hardcoded if/else chain of test_bit() calls and string > >> literals in thpsize_shmem_enabled_show() with a loop over > >> huge_shmem_orders_by_mode[] and huge_shmem_enabled_mode_strings[] arrays. > >> > >> This makes thpsize_shmem_enabled_show() consistent with > >> thpsize_shmem_enabled_store() and eliminates duplicated mode name strings. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ran Xiaokai > > > >The logic looks good, I wish we could de-duplicate. But for now maybe better to > >get this refactored first. > > > >So: > > > >Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes > > > >> --- > >> mm/shmem.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > >> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c > >> index 60cb10854f11..086762e6de71 100644 > >> --- a/mm/shmem.c > >> +++ b/mm/shmem.c > >> @@ -5553,20 +5553,30 @@ static ssize_t thpsize_shmem_enabled_show(struct kobject *kobj, > >> struct kobj_attribute *attr, char *buf) > >> { > >> int order = to_thpsize(kobj)->order; > >> - const char *output; > >> - > >> - if (test_bit(order, &huge_shmem_orders_always)) > >> - output = "[always] inherit within_size advise never"; > >> - else if (test_bit(order, &huge_shmem_orders_inherit)) > >> - output = "always [inherit] within_size advise never"; > >> - else if (test_bit(order, &huge_shmem_orders_within_size)) > >> - output = "always inherit [within_size] advise never"; > >> - else if (test_bit(order, &huge_shmem_orders_madvise)) > >> - output = "always inherit within_size [advise] never"; > >> - else > >> - output = "always inherit within_size advise [never]"; > >> + int active = HUGE_SHMEM_ENABLED_NEVER; > >> + int len = 0; > >> + int i; > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(huge_shmem_orders_by_mode); i++) { > >> + if (test_bit(order, huge_shmem_orders_by_mode[i])) { > >> + active = i; > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + } > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(huge_shmem_enabled_mode_strings); i++) { > >> + if (i == active) > >> + len += sysfs_emit_at(buf, len, "[%s] ", > >> + huge_shmem_enabled_mode_strings[i]); > >> + else > >> + len += sysfs_emit_at(buf, len, "%s ", > >> + huge_shmem_enabled_mode_strings[i]); > >> + } > >> + > >> + /* Replace trailing space with newline */ > >> + buf[len - 1] = '\n'; > >> > >> - return sysfs_emit(buf, "%s\n", output); > >> + return len; > >> } > > > >This is pretty mcuh a one-for-one copy/pasta of defrag_show(), I don't love that > >we have the exact same code duplicated across two files like that. > > > >You could write something like: > > > >static ssize_t thp_sysfs_enabled_show(struct kobject *kobj, > > struct kobj_attribute *attr, char *buf, > > const char *names, int names_len, > > const char *orders_by_mode, int orders_by_mode_len, > > int default_mode) > >{ > > ... > >} > > > >To abstract it, but that's kind of a horrible signature isn't it? :) > > > >Could use a helper struct, but that feels a bit overkill for this hmm... > > > >Really I wonder if we shouldn't have this in huge_memory.c anyway, it's a bit of > >a weird thing to put it in mm/shmem.c, it's more huge pages than shmem imo. > > > >Anyway. The logic itself looks fine so LGTM! > > Yes, after this patch is applied, the read/write handlers for the > shmem_enabled and enabled interfaces will have a lot of duplicated code. > I will continue to investigate whether we can abstract a more generic > function to handle both interfaces. > Introducing a helper struct as a parameter is a good inspiration. Well it'd probably be overkill :) For the time being, let's not do that, and just get this change in (with other changes suggested applied of course), so send a respin without that please. I think it's more important to address the hideous duplication we have _right now_ rather than optimising deduplicating this code :) we can always do that later. Cheers, Lorenzo > > >> > >> static ssize_t thpsize_shmem_enabled_store(struct kobject *kobj, > >> -- > >> 2.25.1 > >> > >> > > > >Cheers, Lorenzo >