From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB3FCC282CC for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 16:28:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846CB2175B for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 16:28:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="sdsIfMHX" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 846CB2175B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 183DA8E0047; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 11:28:21 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 133448E0002; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 11:28:21 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 049618E0047; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 11:28:21 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from mail-lj1-f199.google.com (mail-lj1-f199.google.com [209.85.208.199]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E4998E0002 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 11:28:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-lj1-f199.google.com with SMTP id e12-v6so97538ljb.18 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 08:28:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:dkim-signature:mime-version:references :in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=NqcbSbVgDZtdgzYO2knt/tKwP8VpBZkOZlHZOIDOo1c=; b=TTM5ezFwNMaPY1UfS6xbzfzlsyqVn4mgeKh2x4uuKKNgGXBM0xRDsATbUcJi2G3rIq drnLwsmqX3JNCCfAkFlelsJPwTB9cbqA4t77FuZGcoYaEUKiFxzEhGDUBXaVTMhMwJm7 HlLbqqzIrMjlDxBCUSqay5UA1eZcAb4agl6KTSHDGjbbTMFBNu+jd+KWS1gfTTt8iDp8 Hko2ec5G6Fu/C1khAWw0EiyvGxW6934MSbsoC4C1AioerassrmsENZhpNQCJYvv7cBcg XTIqxI57MYRHy9tuQlkRBlxftZrKHXykiIRFUn+LY5m5zmJeajfJmplUGqOPkH0OWOTk KVRw== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAub591JZHGwGC3ZsM6GJfec4jK4ZJmuNwHpdBqm5FljxGEiWxEL+ a8UbBna9moq+mXTqrDx4FELr2nV7PKVcOXXKLpW0fGt4ZOtY/H6VVUR0ofU5z0Agtf8KFnCD4cv 3gkZAdef6sZHuK1sRbXI7fEFmeLJRa7j2LMb4ItwKzOIWhrzWfLi0jmhZyiHI/v9AJQIUv6chc8 JK44nD3bhPkzYv5562r/Zn5wz9TMPY18MVQxTD5ajv9iH/pUu2dA3l1tPN4wCREm1tTmlCSZNu8 BSaDWM37ZoALTKlGBD5VuSnM7nvo2JSNi7OJ4W9dTqGS3n3M10P6KtGBYGquBMFZ1t9gG0aWkBA cVOnY6tLbU4mPuhvgylU77OLPU2A3AgPoV+zv4Vwkx5UL/EWGO7ydJGktBcFW0YsLHr4LbjOX52 w X-Received: by 2002:a2e:81da:: with SMTP id s26-v6mr10544923ljg.183.1549556899927; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 08:28:19 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a2e:81da:: with SMTP id s26-v6mr10544763ljg.183.1549556896975; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 08:28:16 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549556896; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=dE82UvEciFAZ98cwqObWxR7Q3HBz1BIYhHfvPi7YAZkZj315y1D4AWvGhKe8fCHfkN iqQHL6JLzCxPv7oRgYRwCXQKGlb/9ZfrT0Zs6oIn56PR0fIVwRS/41h5cE87xwDgl5LT cFOBlmNA8bBHKHtZTuu3XMjzIkxFG5ldxVHfdeGCxxfKT6safytzqeI+2PdtXAOmnAkF ajbj7gV+9NlHE+wZvxj89m1PUX8tRz8iz9Qm3DTZzzhhkJAP3lrM5OC3dsOOmNFXUmsL U/7tDz21/B12JZfyfwpcoJCdOCc2zYb3y/ugn3un8PsRWLM/xdQrxmQG9AbFaAHYbs/M 0MBA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=NqcbSbVgDZtdgzYO2knt/tKwP8VpBZkOZlHZOIDOo1c=; b=ldqWToNoHVZXQGNg8DJeKR/FUs6b49C5L7BPrkyOXV+WQ4cAQMSu/leUF/tzFaH1Uz 3eIfc09K4CXh8jVIOnKwBy+YZ4kz6yaKaq1PSYNEqWayhM/Kqc9eSqnf9adi8ZwuPTde Dx8oY6A8W4l3qQUTak43c8XcJd9EYqKjwdaJkQtfWAj1EOs38O6yC0+JmPW6UMxAzCYp ZxLZi3wh7ImxKLeg+ki8yxOoTiwW5IaqEAwL0WAOin0rmSfzSBAc1nDeHVpX0JkukBgQ dfvbPvRyvqsr6q+6MGVdb0HOhXd3HXHUVp1YWjZRv4WydXJ/4edKef3+zyKqjV1cjuM9 4g7w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=sdsIfMHX; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jrdr.linux@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jrdr.linux@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id a27sor4992751lfl.7.2019.02.07.08.28.16 for (Google Transport Security); Thu, 07 Feb 2019 08:28:16 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of jrdr.linux@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.65; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=sdsIfMHX; spf=pass (google.com: domain of jrdr.linux@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.65 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jrdr.linux@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=NqcbSbVgDZtdgzYO2knt/tKwP8VpBZkOZlHZOIDOo1c=; b=sdsIfMHX6Hcka/qDE5Of4d5cYBnxOvraEFktqyRV/YqTIWmQsIImsZno3PQ3QXvChB Ih/lmi/xTQFFrMYlVw+S5XdPaTbtcdmJaI8T0TFfT7FjDEziF0CZBWusxURwBejpR0jo m17dh++ITWi1D5YnoDzkhxCwirtKtc6fisRf2hCqOBX+sgVz9neLdgyiHyHI4CQTE13q PuM67m2S0tSrsluLr/a5PN8VAlpJogm75t4FDAnhA8rZWD74jixsMvIjJLbLh3g6E3h8 K6Eit5WubNjI0TfJ2ZFvGFVh5O2GekVAEB39bM78hq6gAe2q7LM58untWC3Km79KRHm5 2PIw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IacQaPz5X8pueH3UK+eZmUBIcx0wh/8ncR+XUULfqXQ5hVdvW3OYiNZZDwhd/JYuf3FmyVwgiVBSknCrkSOsQE= X-Received: by 2002:a19:6514:: with SMTP id z20mr10885979lfb.31.1549556896462; Thu, 07 Feb 2019 08:28:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1549455025-17706-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <1549455025-17706-2-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1549455025-17706-2-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> From: Souptick Joarder Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 22:02:24 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memblock: remove memblock_{set,clear}_region_flags To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Linux-MM , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 6:01 PM Mike Rapoport wrote: > > The memblock API provides dedicated helpers to set or clear a flag on a > memory region, e.g. memblock_{mark,clear}_hotplug(). > > The memblock_{set,clear}_region_flags() functions are used only by the > memblock internal function that adjusts the region flags. > Drop these functions and use open-coded implementation instead. > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > --- > include/linux/memblock.h | 12 ------------ > mm/memblock.c | 9 ++++++--- > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h > index 71c9e32..32a9a6b 100644 > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h > @@ -317,18 +317,6 @@ void __next_mem_pfn_range_in_zone(u64 *idx, struct zone *zone, > for_each_mem_range_rev(i, &memblock.memory, &memblock.reserved, \ > nid, flags, p_start, p_end, p_nid) > > -static inline void memblock_set_region_flags(struct memblock_region *r, > - enum memblock_flags flags) > -{ > - r->flags |= flags; > -} > - > -static inline void memblock_clear_region_flags(struct memblock_region *r, > - enum memblock_flags flags) > -{ > - r->flags &= ~flags; > -} > - > #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP > int memblock_set_node(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size, > struct memblock_type *type, int nid); > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c > index 0151a5b..af5fe8e 100644 > --- a/mm/memblock.c > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > @@ -851,11 +851,14 @@ static int __init_memblock memblock_setclr_flag(phys_addr_t base, > if (ret) > return ret; > > - for (i = start_rgn; i < end_rgn; i++) > + for (i = start_rgn; i < end_rgn; i++) { > + struct memblock_region *r = &type->regions[i]; Is it fine if we drop this memblock_region *r altogether ? > + > if (set) > - memblock_set_region_flags(&type->regions[i], flag); > + r->flags |= flag; > else > - memblock_clear_region_flags(&type->regions[i], flag); > + r->flags &= ~flag; > + } > > memblock_merge_regions(type); > return 0; > -- > 2.7.4 >