On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 16:43:43 +0800 Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Omit one line by unified folio_put(), and make code more clear.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/damon/paddr.c | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/damon/paddr.c b/mm/damon/paddr.c
> index 2ef9db0189ca..6930ebf3667c 100644
> --- a/mm/damon/paddr.c
> +++ b/mm/damon/paddr.c
> @@ -266,17 +266,16 @@ static inline unsigned long damon_pa_mark_accessed_or_deactivate(
> if (!folio)
> continue;
>
> - if (damos_pa_filter_out(s, folio)) {
> - folio_put(folio);
> - continue;
> - }
> + if (damos_pa_filter_out(s, folio))
> + goto put_folio;
>
> if (mark_accessed)
> folio_mark_accessed(folio);
> else
> folio_deactivate(folio);
> - folio_put(folio);
> applied += folio_nr_pages(folio);
> +put_folio:
> + folio_put(folio);
I think this change is ok, but shouldn't the 'folio_put()' have called before
'folio_nr_pages()' anyway? If so, could we make the change as a separate fix
first, and then make this change, so that it can be easily applied to relevant
stable kernels?
Thanks,
SJ
> }
> return applied * PAGE_SIZE;
> }
> --
> 2.35.3
>
>
