On Mon, 2022-06-13 at 09:05 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K V wrote:
> On 6/13/22 8:56 AM, Ying Huang wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 19:22 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > > With CONFIG_MIGRATION disabled return EINVAL on write.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > mm/memory-tiers.c | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/memory-tiers.c b/mm/memory-tiers.c
> > > index 9c6b40d7e0bf..c3123a457d90 100644
> > > --- a/mm/memory-tiers.c
> > > +++ b/mm/memory-tiers.c
> > > @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ static ssize_t numa_demotion_enabled_store(struct kobject *kobj,
> > > {
> > > ssize_t ret;
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MIGRATION))
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> >
> > How about enclose numa_demotion_enabled_xxx related code with CONFIG_MIGRATION?
> >
>
> IIUC there is a desire to use IS_ENABLED() in the kernel instead of
> #ifdef since that helps in more compile time checks. Because there are
> no dead codes during compile now with IS_ENABLED().
IS_ENABLED() is used to reduce usage of "#ifdef" in ".c" file,
especially inside a function. We have good build test coverage with
0Day now.
To avoid code size inflate, it's better to use #ifdef CONFIG_MIGRATION.
> W.r.t leaving the sysfs file visible even when CONFIG_MIGRATION is
> disabled, I was thinking it gives better visibility into numa_demotion
> status. I could switch to hide numa_demotion file if that is desirable.
>
> > > ret = kstrtobool(buf, &numa_demotion_enabled);
> > > if (ret)
> > > return ret;
> >
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
