On Wed, 2018-09-12 at 11:26 +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> Now that the core code checks this for us, we don't need to do it in the
> backend.
>
> Cc: Chintan Pandya <[email protected]>
> Cc: Toshi Kani <[email protected]>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c | 6 ------
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c b/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
> index ae394552fb94..b4919c44a194 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/pgtable.c
> @@ -796,9 +796,6 @@ int pud_free_pmd_page(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr)
> pte_t *pte;
> int i;
>
> - if (pud_none(*pud))
> - return 1;
> -
Do we need to remove this safe guard? I feel list this is same as
kfree() accepting NULL.
Thanks,
-Toshi
> pmd = (pmd_t *)pud_page_vaddr(*pud);
> pmd_sv = (pmd_t *)__get_free_page(GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!pmd_sv)
> @@ -840,9 +837,6 @@ int pmd_free_pte_page(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr)
> {
> pte_t *pte;
>
> - if (pmd_none(*pmd))
> - return 1;
> -
> pte = (pte_t *)pmd_page_vaddr(*pmd);
> pmd_clear(pmd);
>
