on 3/14/2025 3:47 PM, Kairui Song wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 3:32 PM Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> on 3/14/2025 1:42 AM, Kairui Song wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 8:09 PM Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Factor out the actual swap entry freeing logic to new helper
>>>> __swap_entries_free().
>>>> This allow us to futher simplify other swap entry freeing code by
>>>> leveraging __swap_entries_free() helper function.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kemeng Shi <shikemeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> mm/swapfile.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/mm/swapfile.c b/mm/swapfile.c
>>>> index 5a775456e26c..7c886f9dd6f9 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/swapfile.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/swapfile.c
>>>> @@ -1347,6 +1347,25 @@ static struct swap_info_struct *_swap_info_get(swp_entry_t entry)
>>>> return NULL;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static inline void __swap_entries_free(struct swap_info_struct *si,
>>>> + struct swap_cluster_info *ci,
>>>> + swp_entry_t entry, unsigned int nr_pages)
>>>> +{
>>>> + unsigned long offset = swp_offset(entry);
>>>> +
>>>> + VM_BUG_ON(cluster_is_empty(ci));
>>>> + VM_BUG_ON(ci->count < nr_pages);
>>>> +
>>>> + ci->count -= nr_pages;
>>>> + mem_cgroup_uncharge_swap(entry, nr_pages);
>>>> + swap_range_free(si, offset, nr_pages);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!ci->count)
>>>> + free_cluster(si, ci);
>>>> + else
>>>> + partial_free_cluster(si, ci);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> static unsigned char swap_entry_put_locked(struct swap_info_struct *si,
>>>> unsigned long offset,
>>>> unsigned char usage)
>>>> @@ -1525,22 +1544,13 @@ static void swap_entry_range_free(struct swap_info_struct *si,
>>>>
>>>> /* It should never free entries across different clusters */
>>>> VM_BUG_ON(ci != offset_to_cluster(si, offset + nr_pages - 1));
>>>> - VM_BUG_ON(cluster_is_empty(ci));
>>>> - VM_BUG_ON(ci->count < nr_pages);
>>>>
>>>> - ci->count -= nr_pages;
>>>> do {
>>>> VM_BUG_ON(*map != SWAP_HAS_CACHE);
>>>> *map = 0;
>>>> } while (++map < map_end);
>>>>
>>>> - mem_cgroup_uncharge_swap(entry, nr_pages);
>>>> - swap_range_free(si, offset, nr_pages);
>>>> -
>>>> - if (!ci->count)
>>>> - free_cluster(si, ci);
>>>> - else
>>>> - partial_free_cluster(si, ci);
>>>> + __swap_entries_free(si, ci, entry, nr_pages);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> static void cluster_swap_free_nr(struct swap_info_struct *si,
>>>> --
>>>> 2.30.0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Kemeng,
>> Hello Kairui,
>>
>> Thanks for feedback.
>>>
>>> This patch is a bit too trivial to be a standalone one, you can fold
>>> it with the later one easily. Also you may want to carry the
>>> VM_BUG_ON(ci != offset_to_cluster(si, offset + nr_pages - 1)); check
>>> as well.
>> Sure, I will do this in next version.
>>>
>>> But, that is basically just renaming swap_entry_range_free, you may
>>> just remove the HAS_CACHE check as you rename it, that way the changes
>>> should be cleaner.
>>>
>> Sorry, I don't quite follow. Are you suggesting that should fold this
>> patch to later one which removes the HAS_CACHE check and renmae the
>> swap_entry_range_free.
>
> Hi,
>
> Just some of my nitpicks :)
>
> After you move these parts out of swap_entry_put_locked, there is
> almost nothing left in swap_entry_put_locked except an "open coded
> memset". And in your next patch (also after the whole series), all
> callers of __swap_entries_free will have to call an "open coded
> memset" anyway, so these changes seem redundant and could be improved.
Right, we can simply use swap_entries_free() instead of __swap_entries_free()
int swap_entry_put_locked() after the whole series and this change seems not
necessary. Will improve this in next version.
>
> BTW your next patch has a typo in the commit message:
> s/__swap_entriy_free/__swap_entries_free/g.
Will fix this in next version.
Thanks,
Kemeng
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kemeng
>>
>
