Ning Qu wrote: > > Again. Here and below ifdef is redundant: PageTransHugeCache() is zero > > compile-time and thp case will be optimize out. > > The problem is actually from HPAGE_CACHE_INDEX_MASK, it is marked as > build bug when CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_PAGECACHE is false. So we > either wrap some logic inside a inline function, or we have to be like > this .. Or we don't treat the HPAGE_CACHE_INDEX_MASK as a build bug? HPAGE_CACHE_INDEX_MASK shouldn't be a problem. If it's wrapped into 'if PageTransHugeCache(page)' or similar it will be eliminated by compiler if thp-pc disabled and build bug will not be triggered. > > > > > And do we really need a copy of truncate logic here? Is there a way to > > share code? > > > The truncate between tmpfs and general one is similar but not exactly > the same (no readahead), so share the whole function might not be a > good choice from the perspective of tmpfs? Anyway, there are other > similar functions in tmpfs, e.g. the one you mentioned for > shmem_add_to_page_cache. It is possible to share the code, I am just > worried it will make the logic more complicated? I think introducing thp-pc is good opportunity to refactor all these code. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>