On 2/25/25 17:23, Shakeel Butt wrote: > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 11:30:20PM +0800, Jingxiang Zeng wrote: >> mm/list_lru.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/list_lru.c b/mm/list_lru.c >> index 064d2018e265..e7e13513ff8e 100644 >> --- a/mm/list_lru.c >> +++ b/mm/list_lru.c >> @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ static int memcg_list_lru_alloc(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, struct list_lru *lru) >> } >> xas_unlock_irqrestore(&xas, flags); >> } while (xas_nomem(&xas, GFP_KERNEL)); >> - if (mlru) >> + if (unlikely(mlru)) >> kfree(mlru); > > The report is saying not to check at all. So, just remove the check and > simply call kfree(mlru) as it handles the NULL check efficiently. BTW, if it's unlikely to be !NULL then it's not really efficient to call kfree() unconditionally as it's a function call and those are more expensive than inline check (especially with spectre mitigations).
