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 363B325D1F5 for ; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:23:52 +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=1741800234; cv=none; b=FWpdhUZJZI5fZAL5XqwxL5EywTGUdsc010vG5VaK7xiqW278jnhC0yT/+GOFkF1OxtOV51u2QOMNXvOtlIRonzwmKfU4UHKTwrsBJZyzFc61/akhlGdaSlA2jc3L5LDCzchoOgVFCoXhgy/ZVw6wiG++6ifSlNJJ+GNDAQYS6ls= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741800234; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wh1Fxnshp8oLvMCLtrPIX0gzdOI/IeVWj1yLkdb7azE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=KPGSMmcwPwS8INuJQAUsGFmg/TqloncgXFtwG/3P3j9Y78sH/gjhUdN8SLodpSaqEui5PgZ8utrb7LctmVZkk91PtyD20NqOZ0Q2X/l3rIbdxIma3KK2KXBZJjv2adbWW+3Csz83tF+oGW5uEXaYrKuYN/ildmTSmAclnvje37g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=NRr4R0RH; 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="NRr4R0RH" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D129C4CEDD; Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:23:52 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1741800232; bh=wh1Fxnshp8oLvMCLtrPIX0gzdOI/IeVWj1yLkdb7azE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=NRr4R0RHiZhCC3DDkz4iudYArYbHByGgGONNO9lO1z4AeK9haFC9nUSo0tIMk4uZg PtqIG3RrzgNEsNYlPUF+8SuPcE6YvNMaWZfBJL1R+W5nLVBxeddIFFHvMC2X5y6wge SRpwX++BHv/19EwajZMqXWaGN9RZtqDtcMEDGqwvQia2IoBa9CHEnuLeYEjlyHmpUZ rnSvqBIIsZbh3gVtcMl6y/Z1kdqVFLcGfDgJBbmn5Iy006ATxFpCazAeQSE8J+KrZe qAyGhA8xuTnoaX1gGeEda7nUwK8DmldMlGVIK/qNrthZ50QjB0FpyWRUAsrxm+mFeM JfWfkxAxCdaKA== From: SeongJae Park To: Lorenzo Stoakes Cc: SeongJae Park , Andrew Morton , "Liam R. Howlett" , David Hildenbrand , Shakeel Butt , Vlastimil Babka , kernel-team@meta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] mm/madvise: define and use madvise_behavior struct for madvise_do_behavior() Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 10:23:50 -0700 Message-Id: <20250312172350.59632-1-sj@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.5 In-Reply-To: <2a2eb9de-c8d5-4be0-afec-2efd334dbab9@lucifer.local> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 05:47:02 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 01:56:17PM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote: > > On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 12:17:40 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 10:23:14AM -0700, SeongJae Park wrote: [...] > > > (I wonder if that'd be better as a typedef tbh?) > > > > Something like below? > > > > typedef void *madvise_walk_arg; > > > > I think that could make the code easier to read. But I feel the void pointer > > is also not very bad for the current simple static functions use case, so I'd > > like keep this as is if you don't mind. > > > > Please let me know if I'm missing your point. > > No to be clear I meant the: > > int (*visit)(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > struct vm_area_struct **prev, unsigned long start, > unsigned long end, unsigned long arg) > > Function pointer. Thanks for clarifying! And I agree this is a good idea. > > But this is not a big deal and let's leave it as-is for now, we can address > this later potentially! :) Agreed, either! :) [...] > Thanks for being so flexible on the feedback! Appreciated :>) Thank you for your nice and helpful reviews :) Thanks, SJ