On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 03:12:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:26:58 -0700 Stanislav Kinsburskii 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > @@ -683,15 +683,11 @@ static int nouveau_range_fault(struct nouveau_svmm 
> > *svmm,
> >                     goto out;
> >             }
> >  
> > -           range.notifier_seq = mmu_interval_read_begin(range.notifier);
> > -           mmap_read_lock(mm);
> > -           ret = hmm_range_fault(&range);
> > -           mmap_read_unlock(mm);
> > -           if (ret) {
> > -                   if (ret == -EBUSY)
> > -                           continue;
> > +           ret = hmm_range_fault_unlocked_timeout(&range,
> > +                                                  max(timeout - jiffies,
> > +                                                      1L));
> 
> "1UL" here?  I'd have expected min() to warn, as it likes to do.

I'm not sure... The "timeout - jiffies" can become negative.
Won't 1UL convert both of them to "UL" and thus make the comparison
overflow?

Thanks,
Stanislav

Reply via email to