Re: [RFC PATCH 3/6] mm/damon/core: s/nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp/sample_count_to_bp/

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Obsolete divide-by-zero comment and skip logic were not removed in the KUnit test, contradicting the commit message and core code.
--

--- Patch [3]: [RFC PATCH 3/6] mm/damon/core: s/nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp/sample_count_to_bp/ ---
commit aaafc980a7ea0e3c63783a3dbd0d43aab65ff523
Author: SJ Park <sj@kernel.org>

mm/damon/core: s/nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp/sample_count_to_bp/

This commit renames damon_nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp() to
damon_sample_count_to_bp() to better describe its functionality. It also
mentions removing obsolete comments regarding a division-by-zero bug that
was previously fixed.

> diff --git a/mm/damon/tests/core-kunit.h b/mm/damon/tests/core-kunit.h
> index 0124f83b39b83..86eae3a590354 100644
> --- a/mm/damon/tests/core-kunit.h
> +++ b/mm/damon/tests/core-kunit.h
[ ... ]
> @@ -585,7 +585,7 @@ static void damon_test_nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp(struct kunit *test)
>  	/*
>  	 * In some cases such as 32bit architectures where UINT_MAX is
>  	 * ULONG_MAX, attrs.aggr_interval becomes zero.  Calling
> -	 * damon_nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp() in the case will cause
> +	 * damon_sample_count_to_bp() in the case will cause
>  	 * divide-by-zero.  Such case is prohibited in normal execution since
>  	 * the caution is documented on the comment for the function, and
>  	 * damon_update_monitoring_results() does the check.  Skip the test in
> @@ -594,7 +594,7 @@ static void damon_test_nr_accesses_to_accesses_bp(struct kunit *test)
>  	if (!attrs.aggr_interval)
>  		kunit_skip(test, "aggr_interval is zero.");

[Severity: Medium]
The commit message mentions that the obsolete comment about division-by-zero
is removed because damon_nr_samples_per_aggr() now always returns non-zero.

Should this comment and the associated kunit_skip logic also be removed
from damon_test_sample_count_to_bp()? 

It appears to still reference the caution comment that was removed from the
core code, and it continues to guard against a divide-by-zero that can no
longer happen.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260707043828.97900-1-sj@kernel.org?part=3