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 8F3A82836A6 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 16:07:20 +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=1762531640; cv=none; b=Kgzu9DqKn8P9YOwdX7vWkJYK7hC59cL7EsDmovDqPFGtZCPH2uxP4oUjzFSNYQBpPSumZ++bvCyro3B434lQE54WN/rwx4YkJQUeyqiIFg0cxfzytMpWmVX4Rg+6dYpRpV1i8lYblHTS9QCO/dOTLmDhOZ1x6Xr1MYeiHNhf9Ow= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762531640; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KmNg0IbiQSMgIBfWpyOISbt53znceGdIygj3J1+GoFo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=MIXOdixUV/6Sm6VmESyla3rmbRNf3WnA9alv4+E9B4DZ6Vma0tzYF6b1m8Kk5ShvXZmY+Y/YOpxundHXu4cC8VbO+kTjaAZTWCqZ5iIaQFY9epdcjQ88r2iYRyjDvaM49sJb1y7VBkrIxy3SbsmtHaVHBny8ZZo/NKTM8lSqtCI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=fRZ7r4cT; 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="fRZ7r4cT" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4214CC116B1; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 16:07:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1762531640; bh=KmNg0IbiQSMgIBfWpyOISbt53znceGdIygj3J1+GoFo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=fRZ7r4cTjf5cb+wQfQZKSi3nxrTbj66GE5KbiX42htXpJ44IXf3nBmo+xC4o+q7TA BRXzD67osZZSe5TEP3UnkDASXEMhdSAiGFcXkjedQ7CCSsHMJlwH57SJmRIb/XCc+V sa8Wvr4hF1Jw3bYrpn3i2K6GJEMueq3rSmlNZQiOu89kvKXq8kl+xoD56DiPOKor8h XPHuYlvf27NrmVcpFt+gtjOFbxd/4hbMJbfWr+jh5UFLH2X2tiLpibtfSo2h7LWloB eGQNAROrX3tSYtgs66K6dFgmfjbzrkO5Jm79bK1xZlxpbl2e+L4DUnV41N81eAfEqB gOE15k6fuoYGQ== From: Pratyush Yadav To: Pasha Tatashin Cc: Pratyush Yadav , akpm@linux-foundation.org, rppt@kernel.org, graf@amazon.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/test_kho: Check if KHO is enabled In-Reply-To: (Pasha Tatashin's message of "Fri, 7 Nov 2025 06:15:37 -0500") References: <20251106220635.2608494-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2025 17:07:18 +0100 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Nov 07 2025, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > On Fri, Nov 7, 2025 at 5:24=E2=80=AFAM Pratyush Yadav wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 06 2025, Pasha Tatashin wrote: >> >> > We must check whether KHO is enabled prior to issuing KHO commands, >> > otherwise KHO internal data structures are not initialized. >> >> Should we have this check in the KHO APIs instead? This check is easy >> enough to miss. > > I considered adding a kho_is_enabled() check to every KHO API, but it > seems unnecessary. > > In-kernel users of KHO, like reserve_mem and the upcoming LUO, are > already expected to check if KHO is enabled before doing extra > preservation work. I anticipate any future in-kernel users will follow > the same pattern. Hmm, fair enough. I suppose we can always change this later if it causes more pain. Reviewed-by: Pratyush Yadav [...] --=20 Regards, Pratyush Yadav