On 05.10.22 22:42, Peter Xu wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 04:19:29PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:+int walk_page_range_vma(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long start, + unsigned long end, const struct mm_walk_ops *ops, + void *private) +{ + struct mm_walk walk = { + .ops = ops, + .mm = vma->vm_mm, + .vma = vma, + .private = private, + }; + int err; + + if (start >= end || !walk.mm) + return -EINVAL; + if (start < vma->vm_start || end > vma->vm_end) + return -EINVAL; + + mmap_assert_locked(walk.mm); + + err = walk_page_test(start, end, &walk);According to test_walk(): * @test_walk: caller specific callback function to determine whether * we walk over the current vma or not. Returning 0 means * "do page table walk over the current vma", returning * a negative value means "abort current page table walk * right now" and returning 1 means "skip the current vma" Since this helper has vma passed in, not sure whether this is needed at all?
I kept it because walk_page_vma() similarly has it -- walk_page_vma() walks the whole VMA range.
I do agree that it's kind of weird to have it like that. All users of walk_page_vma() don't use it, so we can just get rid of it there as well. Might make the walk slightly faster.
walk_page_vma_range() sounds slightly better to me as it does look more like an extension of walk_page_vma(), rather than sister version of walk_page_range_novma() (which works for "no backing VMA" case). But no strong opinion.
I matched that to walk_page_range_novma(). Now we have walk_page_range walk_page_vma walk_page_range_novma walk_page_range_vma -- Thanks, David / dhildenb
