On 07/11/2017 12:26 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 07/11/2017 08:50 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Tue 11-07-17 08:26:40, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2017 08:03 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Are you telling me that two if conditions cause more than a second
>>>> difference? That sounds suspicious.
>>>
>>> It's removing also a call to get_unmapped_area(), AFAICS. That means a
>>> vma search?
>>
>> Ohh, right. I have somehow missed that. Is this removal intentional?
>
> I think it is: "Checking for availability of virtual address range at
> the end of the VMA for the incremental size is also reduntant at this
> point."
>
>> The
>> changelog is silent about it.
>
> It doesn't explain why it's redundant, indeed. Unfortunately, the commit
> f106af4e90ea ("fix checks for expand-in-place mremap") which added this,
> also doesn't explain why it's needed.
Its redundant because there are calls to get_unmapped_area() down the
line in the function whose failure will anyway fail the expansion of
the VMA.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
