From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Frederick Mayle <fmayle@google.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
android-mm@google.com, kernel-team@android.com,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/readahead: simplify page_cache_ra_unbounded loop counter reset
Date: Fri, 1 May 2026 06:11:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260501061146.6e61392d125cf1847d7cc181@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260501011908.3630802-1-fmayle@google.com>
On Thu, 30 Apr 2026 18:19:07 -0700 Frederick Mayle <fmayle@google.com> wrote:
> Minor cleanup, no behavior change intended.
>
> `read_pages` ensures that `ractl->_nr_pages` is zero before it returns,
So it seems, but depending upon this might be a bit fragile?
It would be better to make this a more explicit/formal part of the
read_pages() contract. kerneldocifying read_pages() would be a
suitable way.
> so the `ractl->_nr_pages` term in these expressions contributes nothing.
> This seems to have been true since the statements were introduced in
> commit f615bd5c4725f ("mm/readahead: Handle ractl nr_pages being
> modified").
>
> The new expression has an intuitive explanation. When filesystems
> perform readahead, they increment `ractl->_index` by the number of pages
> processed, so, after `read_pages` returns, `ractl->_index` points to the
> first page after those already processed. `index` points to the first
> page considered in the loop. So, `ractl->_index - index` is the number
> of pages processed by the loop so far.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/readahead.c
> +++ b/mm/readahead.c
> @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ void page_cache_ra_unbounded(struct readahead_control *ractl,
> */
> read_pages(ractl);
> ractl->_index += min_nrpages;
> - i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index;
> + i = ractl->_index - index;
> continue;
> }
>
> @@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ void page_cache_ra_unbounded(struct readahead_control *ractl,
> break;
> read_pages(ractl);
> ractl->_index += min_nrpages;
> - i = ractl->_index + ractl->_nr_pages - index;
> + i = ractl->_index - index;
> continue;
> }
> if (i == mark)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-01 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-01 1:19 [PATCH 1/1] mm/readahead: simplify page_cache_ra_unbounded loop counter reset Frederick Mayle
2026-05-01 13:11 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-05-08 2:01 ` Frederick Mayle
2026-05-08 19:24 ` Andrew Morton
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=20260501061146.6e61392d125cf1847d7cc181@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=android-mm@google.com \
--cc=fmayle@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox