On Wed, 22 May 2019 19:51:55 +0000 Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> gcc reports that several variables are defined but not used.
>
> For the first hunk CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE the entire if block is already
> protected by pud_huge() which is forced to 0. None of the stuff under
> the ifdef causes compilation problems as it is already stubbed out in
> the header files.
>
> For the second hunk the dummy huge_page_shift macro doesn't touch the
> argument, so just inline the argument.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/hmm.c
> +++ b/mm/hmm.c
> @@ -797,7 +797,6 @@ static int hmm_vma_walk_pud(pud_t *pudp,
> return hmm_vma_walk_hole_(addr, end, fault,
> write_fault, walk);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE
> pfn = pud_pfn(pud) + ((addr & ~PUD_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> for (i = 0; i < npages; ++i, ++pfn) {
> hmm_vma_walk->pgmap = get_dev_pagemap(pfn,
> @@ -813,9 +812,6 @@ static int hmm_vma_walk_pud(pud_t *pudp,
> }
> hmm_vma_walk->last = end;
> return 0;
> -#else
> - return -EINVAL;
> -#endif
> }
Fair enough.
> split_huge_pud(walk->vma, pudp, addr);
> @@ -1024,9 +1020,8 @@ long hmm_range_snapshot(struct hmm_range *range)
> return -EFAULT;
>
> if (is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma)) {
> - struct hstate *h = hstate_vma(vma);
> -
> - if (huge_page_shift(h) != range->page_shift &&
> + if (huge_page_shift(hstate_vma(vma)) !=
> + range->page_shift &&
> range->page_shift != PAGE_SHIFT)
> return -EINVAL;
Also fair enough. But why the heck is huge_page_shift() a macro? We
keep doing that and it bites so often :(
