[PATCH 2/2] mempolicy: remove redundant check

[PATCH 2/2] mempolicy: remove redundant check

[Bob Liu]

From: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>

Lee's patch "mempolicy: use MPOL_PREFERRED for system-wide
default policy" has made the MPOL_DEFAULT only used in the
memory policy APIs. So, no need to check in __mpol_equal also.
Also get rid of mpol_match_intent() and move its logic directly
into __mpol_equal().

Signed-off-by: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
---
 mm/mempolicy.c |   16 +++++-----------
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index b88e914..17df048 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1787,16 +1787,6 @@ struct mempolicy *__mpol_cond_copy(struct mempolicy *tompol,
 	return tompol;
 }
 
-static int mpol_match_intent(const struct mempolicy *a,
-			     const struct mempolicy *b)
-{
-	if (a->flags != b->flags)
-		return 0;
-	if (!mpol_store_user_nodemask(a))
-		return 1;
-	return nodes_equal(a->w.user_nodemask, b->w.user_nodemask);
-}
-
 /* Slow path of a mempolicy comparison */
 int __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b)
 {
@@ -1804,7 +1794,11 @@ int __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b)
 		return 0;
 	if (a->mode != b->mode)
 		return 0;
-	if (a->mode != MPOL_DEFAULT && !mpol_match_intent(a, b))
+	if (a->flags != b->flags)
+		return 0;
+	if (mpol_store_user_nodemask(a))
+		return 0;
+	if (!nodes_equal(a->w.user_nodemask, b->w.user_nodemask))
 		return 0;
 	switch (a->mode) {
 	case MPOL_BIND:
-- 
1.5.6.3

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] mempolicy: remove redundant check

[Bob Liu]

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
>
> Lee's patch "mempolicy: use MPOL_PREFERRED for system-wide
> default policy" has made the MPOL_DEFAULT only used in the
> memory policy APIs. So, no need to check in __mpol_equal also.
> Also get rid of mpol_match_intent() and move its logic directly
> into __mpol_equal().
>
> Signed-off-by: Bob Liu <lliubbo@gmail.com>
> ---
>  mm/mempolicy.c |   16 +++++-----------
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index b88e914..17df048 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -1787,16 +1787,6 @@ struct mempolicy *__mpol_cond_copy(struct mempolicy *tompol,
>        return tompol;
>  }
>
> -static int mpol_match_intent(const struct mempolicy *a,
> -                            const struct mempolicy *b)
> -{
> -       if (a->flags != b->flags)
> -               return 0;
> -       if (!mpol_store_user_nodemask(a))
> -               return 1;
> -       return nodes_equal(a->w.user_nodemask, b->w.user_nodemask);
> -}
> -
>  /* Slow path of a mempolicy comparison */
>  int __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b)
>  {
> @@ -1804,7 +1794,11 @@ int __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b)
>                return 0;
>        if (a->mode != b->mode)
>                return 0;
> -       if (a->mode != MPOL_DEFAULT && !mpol_match_intent(a, b))
> +       if (a->flags != b->flags)
> +               return 0;
> +       if (mpol_store_user_nodemask(a))
> +               return 0;
> +       if (!nodes_equal(a->w.user_nodemask, b->w.user_nodemask))
>                return 0;
>        switch (a->mode) {
>        case MPOL_BIND:

This patch is uncorrect, I have resend a new one :-)

> --
> 1.5.6.3
>
>

-- 
Regards,
-Bob Liu

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>