On Mon, Dec 2, 2024 at 10:42 AM Kairui Song <ryncsn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Kairui Song <kasong@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > mem_cgroup_uncharge_swap() implies a mem_cgroup_disabled() check, > which is already checked by the caller here. Skip it by calling > __mem_cgroup_uncharge_swap() directly. > > Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c > index 7b3503d12aaf..d3d1eb506eee 100644 > --- a/mm/memcontrol.c > +++ b/mm/memcontrol.c > @@ -4615,7 +4615,7 @@ void mem_cgroup_swapin_uncharge_swap(swp_entry_t entry, unsigned int nr_pages) > * let's not wait for it. The page already received a > * memory+swap charge, drop the swap entry duplicate. > */ > - mem_cgroup_uncharge_swap(entry, nr_pages); > + __mem_cgroup_uncharge_swap(entry, nr_pages); Would it be better to instead remove the mem_cgroup_disabled() check here and have a single check in this path? Anyway, FWIW: Reviewed-by: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@xxxxxxxxxx> > } > } > > -- > 2.47.0 >
