On 01.08.26 04:13, Zi Yan wrote:
Hi all,

This patchset removes PG_private to make space for upcoming PG_folio
(reserved as __PG_folio) for identifying pages from a folio (more details
in Note below). Instead of checking PG_private, all code is changed to
check page/folio->private != NULL instead.

I'm a little bit worried that page/folio->private is in a union, so today
it could (in theory) be != NULL while PG_private isn't set.

Is it really not possible to enter a path where PG_private is tested while
page/folio->private != NULL due to the union being used otherwise (PG_private
not set)?


Juergen

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to