From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
Sidhartha Kumar <sidhartha.kumar@oracle.com>,
Vishal Moola <vishal.moola@gmail.com>,
Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/12] mempolicy: remove confusing MPOL_MF_LAZY dead code
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 23:52:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZRIPNSRSDH2PfG74@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2cb8b08a-a96c-2a61-94dd-4cd51ad0605d@google.com>
On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 01:30:51AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> v3.8 commit b24f53a0bea3 ("mm: mempolicy: Add MPOL_MF_LAZY") introduced
> MPOL_MF_LAZY, and included it in the MPOL_MF_VALID flags; but a720094ded8
> ("mm: mempolicy: Hide MPOL_NOOP and MPOL_MF_LAZY from userspace for now")
> immediately removed it from MPOL_MF_VALID flags, pending further review.
> "This will need to be revisited", but it has not been reinstated.
>
> The present state is confusing: there is dead code in mm/mempolicy.c to
> handle MPOL_MF_LAZY cases which can never occur. Remove that: it can be
> resurrected later if necessary. But keep the definition of MPOL_MF_LAZY,
> which must remain in the UAPI, even though it always fails with EINVAL.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/1553041659-46787-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com/
> links to a previous request to remove MPOL_MF_LAZY.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-25 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-25 8:17 [PATCH 00/12] mempolicy: cleanups leading to NUMA mpol without vma Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:21 ` [PATCH 01/12] hugetlbfs: drop shared NUMA mempolicy pretence Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:09 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-25 22:46 ` Andi Kleen
2023-09-26 22:26 ` Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:22 ` [PATCH 02/12] kernfs: drop shared NUMA mempolicy hooks Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:10 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-25 8:24 ` [PATCH 03/12] mempolicy: fix migrate_pages(2) syscall return nr_failed Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:22 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-26 20:47 ` Hugh Dickins
2023-09-27 8:02 ` Huang, Ying
2023-09-30 4:20 ` Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:25 ` [PATCH 04/12] mempolicy trivia: delete those ancient pr_debug()s Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-25 8:26 ` [PATCH 05/12] mempolicy trivia: slightly more consistent naming Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:28 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-25 8:28 ` [PATCH 06/12] mempolicy trivia: use pgoff_t in shared mempolicy tree Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:31 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-25 22:38 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-26 21:19 ` Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:29 ` [PATCH 07/12] mempolicy: mpol_shared_policy_init() without pseudo-vma Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:50 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-26 21:36 ` Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:30 ` [PATCH 08/12] mempolicy: remove confusing MPOL_MF_LAZY dead code Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:52 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2023-09-25 8:32 ` [PATCH 09/12] mm: add page_rmappable_folio() wrapper Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 22:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-26 21:58 ` Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:33 ` [PATCH 10/12] mempolicy: alloc_pages_mpol() for NUMA policy without vma Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:35 ` [PATCH 11/12] mempolicy: mmap_lock is not needed while migrating folios Hugh Dickins
2023-09-25 8:36 ` [PATCH 12/12] mempolicy: migration attempt to match interleave nodes Hugh Dickins
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=ZRIPNSRSDH2PfG74@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=sidhartha.kumar@oracle.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vishal.moola@gmail.com \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).