On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 08:58:35PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > > On 11/10/21 8:29 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 04:40:44PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > > > Currently we have some times the following judgments repeated in the > > > code: > > > > > > is_swap_pmd(*pmd) || pmd_trans_huge(*pmd) || pmd_devmap(*pmd) > > > > > > which is to determine whether the *pmd is a huge pmd, so introduce > > > is_huge_pmd() helper to deduplicate them. > > > > Isn't this pmd_leaf() ? > > Currently, the implementation of pmd_leaf() does not include > pmd_devmap() checks. Are you sure? I thought x86 did via the tricky bit checks? > But considering the semantics of pmd_leaf(), the "devmap" pmd should > also belong to "leaf" pmd. Maybe we should modify pmd_leaf() to make > it more semantically consistent? I would prefer that.. Jason
