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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E50CCE79A4 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 22:31:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D001D6B0120; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 18:31:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id CB0336B0124; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 18:31:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B509E6B0125; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 18:31:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0D2F6B0120 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 18:31:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 751B980792 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 22:31:58 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81276568716.10.D8397F7 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D601FA003A for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 22:31:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=FQG3po5l; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1695681116; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=FuX7ZhPNdsEfp0dIlYaP4PSQgtbMhjdLDod/EvVvJts=; b=Tvh4toUXZVASAa6duH6uF43JN2iVRVm+J0fc+zrlM/FKUwPa5tAeBe4i/KDmc+xPvyoBMw Zig50DqhzxivQQJc7RGeubBZbTJdbh5W0zdvP2cZxvy2pHnekRLqTiwunoHL1fhi7b6IfP 3KdeiTuZF1u84IoiLr3at0ivft+Fj78= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf15.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=FQG3po5l; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf15.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1695681116; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Bd/lKK7Fq0186OR3ZQpM0Laxf7gl6283TqNDmD2PvAn8/y+I/z5hi7HVyRMJkxyyP9gI0l 8aY9RKJ5Zb/HQeKwLUYJKEeFqDe08X6Qns+7F3zHCBN8N7bqf6SgAeC67fF4re08aU9QC9 0RWBaRxJnglR6nTuYd27ZgB5/xZ7EbA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=FuX7ZhPNdsEfp0dIlYaP4PSQgtbMhjdLDod/EvVvJts=; b=FQG3po5l7sdfeoZyvP9SU45Ivx lcCEwkGaJpPAuy6e3Vhm5avyqWlcGtyC27leG1CA07UKWBak/ae6WfO2n8rF272f2qX4f9geeOIuc Xxs/vMs83cLU9VH1gyYgDrf1XYxGw7KO56csB1Az9aGd70jN6eLQS3C7870eUGVbm2/0GHPQ1yYqA 5fxLY12M7tcAfrjglmCZfL4QJqTy4yaf8UUNu/sOINfpLZrH8CfLO45Fa5XfQSiWZdRKdCloouAG9 vfyciH1DqP/ae5n0rGVPF3Gu3bb1yx8XLeRmU7gmJj/qB4cMgZQwi2cafwYl9eKJYXdkJ779VY1LF FKaj+dmg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qku7A-0043Gc-Pl; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 22:31:41 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 23:31:40 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen , Christoph Lameter , Mike Kravetz , David Hildenbrand , Suren Baghdasaryan , Yang Shi , Sidhartha Kumar , Vishal Moola , Kefeng Wang , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Tejun Heo , Mel Gorman , Michal Hocko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] mempolicy trivia: use pgoff_t in shared mempolicy tree Message-ID: References: <2d872cef-7787-a7ca-10e-9d45a64c80b4@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D601FA003A X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Stat-Signature: ag3okafpnzy64pq5gq6i8cgjnr9yqn3h X-HE-Tag: 1695681116-152219 X-HE-Meta: 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 ZPetrWBx pqVdNX9XYrs6C8JxVQnT27Q9MMI7iPnIA54o2JvrGJJGk/XIZBeyPs8Q/+KJ35J8pnVt9492rLRk++akRarfJ9nOMkuYnMrGpPfH1nmnLb7pyqq3OOD8uEbZy2a1L6aAiyDC4eDviDflKS1hbjYtgqcDCnAJarwy1kif0tT8YnBoGGZ0emu8HKSvt2DKy9rVr6eCuWjXY+YI5zD8sJM+8d5bUxJpoGiVGX0lQdtBZ7N9TShLldgHBVQ0CcGWU0UFWgFKX 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 Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 01:28:14AM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote: > Prefer the more explicit "pgoff_t" to "unsigned long" when dealing with > a shared mempolicy tree. Delete confusing comment about pseudo mm vmas. Yes, with three quibbles > struct sp_node { > struct rb_node nd; > - unsigned long start, end; > + pgoff_t start, end; > struct mempolicy *policy; > }; > - > struct shared_policy { Did you intend to delete the blank line between these two structs? That's not our normal style. > +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c > @@ -2444,7 +2444,7 @@ bool __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b) > * reading or for writing > */ > static struct sp_node * > -sp_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long start, unsigned long end) > +sp_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, pgoff_t start, pgoff_t end) While you're reformatting anyway, mind joining these two lines? > @@ -2499,7 +2499,7 @@ static void sp_insert(struct shared_policy *sp, struct sp_node *new) > > /* Find shared policy intersecting idx */ > struct mempolicy * > -mpol_shared_policy_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, unsigned long idx) > +mpol_shared_policy_lookup(struct shared_policy *sp, pgoff_t idx) Ditto