On 2020/5/6 9:33, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote: > > > On 2020/5/6 1:25, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 07:55:41PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote: >>> +++ b/mm/swapfile.c >>> @@ -177,8 +177,8 @@ static int discard_swap(struct swap_info_struct *si) >>> >>> /* Do not discard the swap header page! */ >>> se = first_se(si); >>> - start_block = (se->start_block + 1) << (PAGE_SHIFT - 9); >>> - nr_blocks = ((sector_t)se->nr_pages - 1) << (PAGE_SHIFT - 9); >>> + start_block = (se->start_block + 1) << SECTORS_PER_PAGE_SHIFT; >>> + nr_blocks = ((sector_t)se->nr_pages - 1) << SECTORS_PER_PAGE_SHIFT; >> >> Thinking about this some more, wouldn't this look better? >> >> start_block = page_sectors(se->start_block + 1); >> nr_block = page_sectors(se->nr_pages - 1); >> > > OK，That's fine, it's clearer. And in this way, there won't be more than 80 columns. Should we rename "page_sectors" to "page_to_sectors"? Because we may need to define "sectors_to_page" also. > >> >> . >> -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
