Re: [PATCH v3 05/11] mm, fsdax: Refactor memory-failure handler for dax mapping

[Ruan Shiyang]

On 2021/2/10 下午9:33, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +extern int mf_dax_mapping_kill_procs(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, int flags);
>
> No nee for the extern, please avoid the overly long line.

OK.

I'd like to confirm one thing...  I have checked all of this patchset by 
checkpatch.pl and it did not report the overly long line warning.  So, I 
should still obey the rule of 80 chars one line?

> > @@ -120,6 +121,13 @@ static int hwpoison_filter_dev(struct page *p)
> >   	if (PageSlab(p))
> >   		return -EINVAL;
> >   
> > +	if (pfn_valid(page_to_pfn(p))) {
> > +		if (is_device_fsdax_page(p))
> > +			return 0;
> > +		else
> > +			return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> > +
>
> This looks odd.  For one there is no need for an else after a return.
> But more importantly page_mapping() as called below pretty much assumes
> a valid PFN, so something is fishy in this function.

Yes, a mistake here.  I'll fix it.

> > +	if (is_zone_device_page(p)) {
> > +		if (is_device_fsdax_page(p))
> > +			tk->addr = vma->vm_start +
> > +					((pgoff - vma->vm_pgoff) << PAGE_SHIFT);
>
> The arithmetics here scream for a common helper, I suspect there might
> be other places that could use the same helper.
>
> > +int mf_dax_mapping_kill_procs(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t index, int flags)
>
> Overly long line.  Also the naming scheme with the mf_ seems rather
> unusual. Maybe dax_kill_mapping_procs?  Also please add a kerneldoc
> comment describing the function given that it exported.

OK.  Thanks for your guidance.


--
Thanks,
Ruan Shiyang.

>