On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 09:56:17AM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 8:28 AM Lorenzo Stoakes > <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 08:26:01PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > > > vma_init() already memset's the whole vm_area_struct to 0, so there is > > > no need to an additional vma_numab_state_init(). > > > > Hm strangely random change :) I'm guessing this was a pre-existing thing? > > Yeah, I stumbled on it while working on an earlier version of this > patchset which involved ctor usage. > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> > > > > I mean this looks fine, so fair enough just feels a bit incongruous with > > series. But regardless: > > > > Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > include/linux/mm.h | 1 - > > > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h > > > index a99b11ee1f66..c8da64b114d1 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/mm.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/mm.h > > > @@ -948,7 +948,6 @@ static inline void vma_init(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct mm_struct *mm) > > > vma->vm_mm = mm; > > > vma->vm_ops = &vma_dummy_vm_ops; > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vma->anon_vma_chain); > > > - vma_numab_state_init(vma); > > > vma_lock_init(vma, false); > > > } > > > > This leaves one other caller in vm_area_dup() (I _hate_ that this lives in > > the fork code... - might very well look at churning some VMA stuff over > > from there to an appropriate place). > > > > While we're here, I mean this thing seems a bit of out scope for the series > > but if we're doing it, can we just remove vma_numab_state_init() and > > instead edit vm_area_init_from() to #ifdef ... this like the other fields > > now? > > > > I's not exactly urgent though as this stuff in the fork code is a bit of a > > mess anyway... > > Yeah, let's keep the cleanup out for now. The series is already quite > big. I included this one-line cleanup since it was uncontroversial and > simple. Yeah it's fine not a big deal. We can address this trivia later. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > 2.47.1.613.gc27f4b7a9f-goog > > >
