Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: Constify folio_order()/folio_test_pmd_mappable()

["Zi Yan" <ziy@nvidia.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1461 bytes --]

On Wed Jun 26, 2024 at 12:30 AM EDT, ran xiaokai wrote:
> > On Tue Jun 25, 2024 at 10:49 PM EDT, ran xiaokai wrote:
> > > From: Ran Xiaokai <ran.xiaokai@zte.com.cn>
> > >
> > > Constify folio_order()/folio_test_pmd_mappable().
> > > No functional changes, just a preparation for the next patch.
> > 
> > What warning/error are you seeing when you just apply patch 2? I wonder why it
> > did not show up in other places. Thanks.
>
> fs/proc/page.c: In function 'stable_page_flags':
> fs/proc/page.c:152:35: warning: passing argument 1 of 'folio_test_pmd_mappable' discards 'const' qualifier from pointer target type [-Wdiscarded-qualifiers]
>   152 |  else if (folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio)) {
>       |                                   ^~~~~
> In file included from include/linux/mm.h:1115,
>                  from include/linux/memblock.h:12,
>                  from fs/proc/page.c:2:
> include/linux/huge_mm.h:380:58: note: expected 'struct folio *' but argument is of type 'const struct folio *'
>   380 | static inline bool folio_test_pmd_mappable(struct folio *folio)
>
> u64 stable_page_flags(const struct page *page)
> {
> 	const struct folio *folio; // the const definition causes the warning
> 	...

Please include the warning in the commit log to explain the change.

> }
>
> As almost all the folio_test_XXX(flags) have converted to received
> a const parameter, it is Ok to also do this for folio_order()?

Yes.


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 854 bytes --]