On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 18:39:36 +0800 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Now the isolate_hugetlb() only returns 0 or -EBUSY, and most users did not
> care about the negative value, thus we can convert the isolate_hugetlb()
> to return a boolean value to make code more clear when checking the
> hugetlb isolation state. Moreover converts 2 users which will consider
> the negative value returned by isolate_hugetlb().
>
> No functional changes intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
[...]
> include/linux/hugetlb.h | 6 +++---
> mm/hugetlb.c | 13 ++++++++-----
> mm/memory-failure.c | 2 +-
> mm/mempolicy.c | 2 +-
> mm/migrate.c | 7 +++----
> 5 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
[...]
> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 3a01a9dbf445..16513cd23d5d 100644
> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -2925,13 +2925,16 @@ static int alloc_and_dissolve_hugetlb_folio(struct hstate *h,
> */
> goto free_new;
> } else if (folio_ref_count(old_folio)) {
> + bool isolated;
> +
> /*
> * Someone has grabbed the folio, try to isolate it here.
> * Fail with -EBUSY if not possible.
> */
> spin_unlock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
> - ret = isolate_hugetlb(old_folio, list);
> + isolated = isolate_hugetlb(old_folio, list);
> spin_lock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
> + ret = isolated ? 0 : -EBUSY;
> goto free_new;
Nit. I'd personally prefer to set 'ret' before entering this critical section
to keep the section short, but this would be just a mean comment that wouldn't
worth request respin.
Thanks,
SJ
[...]
