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 F1494CDB482 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:42:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 59BA68D015E; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 11:42:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 54BAF8D0016; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 11:42:19 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 43B238D015E; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 11:42:19 -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 34B1A8D0016 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 11:42:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin07.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098621402E5 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:42:19 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81358998798.07.0AEABFB Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 613DFC0035 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:42:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of cmarinas@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=cmarinas@kernel.org; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=arm.com (policy=none) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1697643737; 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; bh=Othonz4h54SeGIzH8u6iMsnnlBlisak2p+Huf9yyHgc=; b=15zu26ede/mXUb3fsXQm+bi7p5VHLlyC4JjjrGmwKLeIU0F+qyLRUxIrLxOvlW7FMMYxvY lMfl+BM2QIfGdsGd1FwcrQqL9u5MwTuNN/8oLo0gX5VT2aS+/8gZPU7QANZ6db4/gMXz/W Fp1AguEweaEqS3lwl8LZPznkYztFL9I= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1697643737; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=h6b1UZSxh4wjrKUFc1Qd7gE/DfsE2xA5OE7MhrqKDhpYzRJprB2gKE/ZKyANxqfqEt7Q/s pOoaG1BV4eGbwQwm3M+R4rvyyfp9BwySnrVpP+Vs0pGp+WOVJ0dSzlqI+kQIIbn8WF7Ovx dPZlCPeW+zhQCLUTmdsBqMPnbJbz/bM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of cmarinas@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=cmarinas@kernel.org; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=arm.com (policy=none) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59D5061866; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:42:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9AD0FC433C8; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 15:42:14 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 16:42:12 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Liu Shixin Cc: Patrick Wang , Andrew Morton , Kefeng Wang , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] mm: kmemleak: split __create_object into two functions Message-ID: References: <20231018102952.3339837-1-liushixin2@huawei.com> <20231018102952.3339837-5-liushixin2@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231018102952.3339837-5-liushixin2@huawei.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 613DFC0035 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: ydht47f3dc5udprqmqthw41pcamafity X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-HE-Tag: 1697643737-61796 X-HE-Meta: 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 uBjxDXn6 ZTiLvVC+XWbOkesk5D6WAmv4aNDui/8uE/d5e9UWWZrNGHsm00km4ajZG6e6238C3X2K9ba62QJwZJG5QtPMd5YUbzCJ9W0gWV/6Eh9EHLph+D2SLY7Lhk+1QZsx1908+6KqLD55IX1lXlRbB5uJP/b+Stwyj59rilI2N82beA6E1uWnEHDSSUnKsQT9K0uRSatZCrYlJZdbgsZYxizN9XE6JS16Gl32q7ZYPi/Ci2VsApqtHKKODVkdnemIH89PMln7EGLGTk7tlXhi73ciZTdoPfNTGzVWXRZi0HSkJMGu+uT78yqGg/uiKWx5yS5hJgtLc15SEiu1K+yQGNC3D7PSEYduWBD+NGZbd0AHM9a6nPhczDzl537LEConevEUcH/Nqhsv7zkcaWJ+P0noEhYJti1GTaz8fiiwdX67pOmQ6MA9flUXL0fm17g== 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: Thanks for this, it looks better. On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 06:29:49PM +0800, Liu Shixin wrote: > -/* > - * Create the metadata (struct kmemleak_object) corresponding to an allocated > - * memory block and add it to the object_list and object_tree_root (or > - * object_phys_tree_root). > - */ > -static void __create_object(unsigned long ptr, size_t size, > - int min_count, gfp_t gfp, bool is_phys) > +static struct kmemleak_object * __alloc_object(gfp_t gfp) > { > - unsigned long flags; > - struct kmemleak_object *object, *parent; > - struct rb_node **link, *rb_parent; > - unsigned long untagged_ptr; > - unsigned long untagged_objp; > + struct kmemleak_object *object; > > object = mem_pool_alloc(gfp); > if (!object) { > pr_warn("Cannot allocate a kmemleak_object structure\n"); > kmemleak_disable(); > - return; > + return NULL; > } > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&object->object_list); > @@ -649,13 +639,8 @@ static void __create_object(unsigned long ptr, size_t size, > INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&object->area_list); > raw_spin_lock_init(&object->lock); > atomic_set(&object->use_count, 1); > - object->flags = OBJECT_ALLOCATED | (is_phys ? OBJECT_PHYS : 0); > - object->pointer = ptr; > - object->size = kfence_ksize((void *)ptr) ?: size; > object->excess_ref = 0; > - object->min_count = min_count; > object->count = 0; /* white color initially */ > - object->jiffies = jiffies; > object->checksum = 0; > object->del_state = 0; I'd keep all the initialisation in one place even if it means passing more arguments to __alloc_object(). It feels a bit weird and error prone to split the initialisation in two places. Otherwise I'm fine with the split. -- Catalin