Message ID | 20180815144219.6014-3-osalvador@techadventures.net (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | Refactoring for remove_memory_section/unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes | expand |
On 18-08-15 16:42:17, Oscar Salvador wrote: > From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > > Before calling to unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(), > remove_memory_section() already checks if we got a valid memory_block. > > No need to check that again in unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(). > > If more functions start using unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() in the > future, we can always place a WARN_ON to catch null mem_blk's so we can > safely back off. > > For now, let us keep the check in remove_memory_section() since it is the > only function that uses it. > > Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Reviewed-by: Pavel Tatashin <pavel.tatashin@microsoft.com> > --- > drivers/base/node.c | 4 ---- > 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c > index 1ac4c36e13bb..dd3bdab230b2 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/node.c > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c > @@ -455,10 +455,6 @@ int unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk, > NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL); > unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn; > > - if (!mem_blk) { > - NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes); > - return -EFAULT; > - } > if (!unlinked_nodes) > return -ENOMEM; > nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes); > -- > 2.13.6 >
On 15.08.2018 16:42, Oscar Salvador wrote: > From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > > Before calling to unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(), > remove_memory_section() already checks if we got a valid memory_block. > > No need to check that again in unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(). > > If more functions start using unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() in the > future, we can always place a WARN_ON to catch null mem_blk's so we can > safely back off. > > For now, let us keep the check in remove_memory_section() since it is the > only function that uses it. > > Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > --- > drivers/base/node.c | 4 ---- > 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c > index 1ac4c36e13bb..dd3bdab230b2 100644 > --- a/drivers/base/node.c > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c > @@ -455,10 +455,6 @@ int unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk, > NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL); > unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn; > > - if (!mem_blk) { > - NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes); > - return -EFAULT; > - } > if (!unlinked_nodes) > return -ENOMEM; > nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes); > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c index 1ac4c36e13bb..dd3bdab230b2 100644 --- a/drivers/base/node.c +++ b/drivers/base/node.c @@ -455,10 +455,6 @@ int unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk, NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL); unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn; - if (!mem_blk) { - NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes); - return -EFAULT; - } if (!unlinked_nodes) return -ENOMEM; nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes);