On 09/22, Peter Xu wrote:
>
> Or I can also do it in inverted order if you think better:
>
>         if (unlikely(copy_ret == COPY_MM_BREAK_COW)) {
>                 WARN_ON_ONCE(!data.cow_new_page);
>                 ...
>         }

Peter, let me say this again. I don't understand this code enough, you
can safely ignore me ;)

However. Personally I strongly prefer the above. Personally I really
dislike this part of 4/5:

         again:
        +       /* We don't reset this for COPY_MM_BREAK_COW */
        +       memset(&data, 0, sizeof(data));
        +
        +again_break_cow:

If we rely on "copy_ret == COPY_MM_BREAK_COW" we can unify "again" and
"again_break_cow", we don't need to clear ->cow_new_page, this makes the
logic more understandable. To me at least ;)

Oleg.

Reply via email to