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=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 36906C4320A for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACDE761008 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:24 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org ACDE761008 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id F2F666B0071; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 04:58:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id EDE1D8D0001; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 04:58:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id DCC816B0073; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 04:58:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0194.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.194]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C33196B0071 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 04:58:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin06.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 725C6181E8E67 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:23 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78462198486.06.382D63B Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) by imf23.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E95390093E8 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap1.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap1.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.73]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C08CA1FEAF; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1628672301; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=d95fm1Mc+V7vY5Yxcw83zu4yFAdtfpX8CP9valakjYQ=; b=H6zImDqHUdh5nQQUQqFs0lGsMBeotc6M2Iapp8KDLhDAXPg/X/v4rM9CnPGbXjS1PTyB4T 156112GUncUNtIaJTN3G27Qda6/j6GXl6Ki5ufC8bOX4jt6PTHT+Y7TGwYWMwB9n6g99RK E3nSmwNcztN6V5UdRhH5YTjJGLlTIBM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1628672301; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=d95fm1Mc+V7vY5Yxcw83zu4yFAdtfpX8CP9valakjYQ=; b=tRkHhChRQ1KR9UXlEP8vOmAOV+UgcuuI41G5vJJgu+79LsONbmVfRzDzZtOHKX0iiFG8QW tDnL9OktMZyqlzBg== Received: from imap1.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap1.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.73]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A216E136D9; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap1.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id JHTrJi2RE2FweAAAGKfGzw (envelope-from ); Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:58:21 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 011/138] mm/lru: Add folio LRU functions To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Yu Zhao , Christoph Hellwig , David Howells , "Kirill A . Shutemov" References: <20210715033704.692967-1-willy@infradead.org> <20210715033704.692967-12-willy@infradead.org> <91fb7d5b-9f5f-855e-2c87-dab105d5c977@suse.cz> From: Vlastimil Babka Message-ID: <3af5a403-2eb9-cc87-f76d-cbbefe5bc82a@suse.cz> Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 10:58:21 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam04 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0E95390093E8 Authentication-Results: imf23.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=H6zImDqH; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=tRkHhChR; dmarc=none; spf=pass (imf23.hostedemail.com: domain of vbabka@suse.cz designates 195.135.220.29 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=vbabka@suse.cz X-Stat-Signature: tozaktdyg1qpy7jmkddzaprut98ndadr X-HE-Tag: 1628672302-221075 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 8/10/21 7:43 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 06:01:16PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >> Actually looking at the git version, which has also this: >> >> static __always_inline void update_lru_size(struct lruvec *lruvec, >> enum lru_list lru, enum zone_type zid, >> - int nr_pages) >> + long nr_pages) >> { >> >> Why now and here? Some of the functions called from update_lru_size() >> still take int so this looks arbitrary? > > I'm still a little freaked out about the lack of warning for: > > void f(long n); > void g(unsigned int n) { f(-n); } > > so I've decided that the count of pages in a folio is always of type > long. The actual number is positive, and currently it's between 1 and > 1024 (inclusive on both bounds), so it's always going to be > representable in an int. Narrowing it doesn't cause a bug, so we don't > need to change nr_pages anywhere, but it does no harm to make functions > take a long instead of an int (it may even cause slightly better code > generation, based on the sample of functions I've looked at). > > Maybe changing update_lru_size() in this patch is wrong. I can drop it > if you like. It's fine, knowing it wasn't some rebasing error.