On 3/28/20 7:42 PM, Wei Yang wrote:
For all 0 nodemask_t, we have already define macro NODE_MASK_NONE.
Leverage this to define an all clear nodemask.
It would be a little clearer if you used wording more like this:
Subject: [Patch v3] mm/page_alloc.c: use NODE_MASK_NONE in build_zonelists()
Slightly simplify the code by initializing user_mask with
NODE_MASK_NONE, instead of later calling nodes_clear(). This saves
a line of code.
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@xxxxxxxxx>
---
v3: adjust the commit log a little
v2: use NODE_MASK_NONE as suggested by David Hildenbrand
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index ef790dfad6aa..dfcf2682ed40 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -5587,14 +5587,13 @@ static void build_zonelists(pg_data_t *pgdat)
{
static int node_order[MAX_NUMNODES];
int node, load, nr_nodes = 0;
- nodemask_t used_mask;
+ nodemask_t used_mask = NODE_MASK_NONE;
int local_node, prev_node;
/* NUMA-aware ordering of nodes */
local_node = pgdat->node_id;
load = nr_online_nodes;
prev_node = local_node;
- nodes_clear(used_mask);
memset(node_order, 0, sizeof(node_order));
while ((node = find_next_best_node(local_node, &used_mask)) >= 0) {
Honestly, I don't think it's really worth doing a patch for this, but
there's nothing wrong with the diff, so:
Reviewed-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@xxxxxxxxxx>
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
