Re: [External] Re: [QUESTION] mm: Redundant const parameter?

[Dev Jain]

Yes; Matthew just did a wider fix:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240531122904.2790052-1-willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/


On 5/31/24 18:00, Chengming Zhou wrote:
> On 2024/5/31 19:31, Dev Jain wrote:
> > I guess it would be better if I send this as a patch and wait for comments.
> Ah, you're right. I think it should be:
>
> 	return folio_test_workingset(slab_folio(slab));
>
> Right? Don't notice there isn't any build warning about this "const" discard.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > On 5/31/24 16:42, Dev Jain wrote:
> > > Hi Chengming,
> > >
> > > In mm/slub.c, you had defined slab_test_node_partial() to take a const parameter.
> > >
> > > Is there any point of taking in a const, when you are anyways typecasting it to
> > >
> > > a (struct folio *) from (const struct folio *) ? In fact, at the place where you call
> > >
> > > slab_test_node_partial(), the struct slab *slab is not const.
> > >
> > > Please comment.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > DJ