On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 01:19:06PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> > diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c
> > index f45a3a5be53a48..3a9f764165f50b 100644
> > --- a/mm/gup.c
> > +++ b/mm/gup.c
> > @@ -1343,13 +1343,22 @@ static __always_inline long __get_user_pages_locked(struct mm_struct *mm,
> > unsigned int flags)
> > {
> > long ret, pages_done;
> > - bool lock_dropped;
> > + bool lock_dropped = false;
>
> A small thing, but the naming and the associated comments later are now
> inaccurate. Let's add function-level documentation to explain the new
> calling convention for __get_user_pages_locked(), change the name of
> lock_dropped to must_unlock, add a comment mid-function, and correct the
> comment at the end of the function. Like this:
Done
> > @@ -3180,14 +3183,13 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(pin_user_pages);
> > long pin_user_pages_unlocked(unsigned long start, unsigned long nr_pages,
> > struct page **pages, unsigned int gup_flags)
> > {
> > - /* FOLL_GET and FOLL_PIN are mutually exclusive. */
> > - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(gup_flags & FOLL_GET))
> > - return -EINVAL;
>
> Why are we dropping the assertion check for FOLL_GET?
Hmm, I think this is a rebase error, it should be in the "consolidate
invariants" patch
Thanks,
Jason
