On Tue, Nov 05, 2024 at 05:30:14PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 05.11.24 13:56, Petr Vaněk wrote:
Hi David,
Hi Petr,
On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 11:07:55AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c index 9aea11b1477c..dfd6577225d8 100644 --- a/mm/huge_memory.c +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c @@ -78,19 +78,8 @@ bool hugepage_vma_check(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long vm_flags, if (!vma->vm_mm) /* vdso */ return false;
- /*
* Explicitly disabled through madvise or prctl, or some
* architectures may disable THP for some mappings, for
* example, s390 kvm.
* */
- if ((vm_flags & VM_NOHUGEPAGE) ||
test_bit(MMF_DISABLE_THP, &vma->vm_mm->flags))
return false;
- /*
* If the hardware/firmware marked hugepage support disabled.
*/
- if (transparent_hugepage_flags & (1 << TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE_UNSUPPORTED))
return false;
- if (thp_disabled_by_hw() || vma_thp_disabled(vma, vm_flags))
return 0;
Shouldn't this return false for consistency with the rest of the function?
Yes, that's better. Same applies to the 6.1.y backport of this.
Ok, dropping this from the review queue, please resend the updated versions.
thansk,
greg k-h