On 2016/9/22 5:16, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, zijun_hu wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
>> index cc6ecd6..a125ae8 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
>> @@ -2576,32 +2576,13 @@ void pcpu_free_vm_areas(struct vm_struct **vms, int
>> nr_vms)
>> static void *s_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
>> __acquires(&vmap_area_lock)
>> {
>> -loff_t n = *pos;
>> -struct vmap_area *va;
>> -
>> spin_lock(&vmap_area_lock);
>> -va = list_first_entry(&vmap_area_list, typeof(*va), list);
>> -while (n > 0 && &va->list != &vmap_area_list) {
>> -n--;
>> -va = list_next_entry(va, list);
>> -}
>> -if (!n && &va->list != &vmap_area_list)
>> -return va;
>> -
>> -return NULL;
>> -
>> +return seq_list_start(&vmap_area_list, *pos);
>> }
>>
>> static void *s_next(struct seq_file *m, void *p, loff_t *pos)
>> {
>> -struct vmap_area *va = p, *next;
>> -
>> -++*pos;
>> -next = list_next_entry(va, list);
>> -if (&next->list != &vmap_area_list)
>> -return next;
>> -
>> -return NULL;
>> +return seq_list_next(p, &vmap_area_list, pos);
>> }
>>
>> static void s_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
>> @@ -2636,9 +2617,11 @@ static void show_numa_info(struct seq_file *m, struct
>> vm_struct *v)
>>
>> static int s_show(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
>> {
>> -struct vmap_area *va = p;
>> +struct vmap_area *va;
>> struct vm_struct *v;
>>
>> +va = list_entry((struct list_head *)p, struct vmap_area, list);
>
> Looks good other than no cast is neccessary above.
you are right, it will correct it
i refer to show_timer()@fs/proc/base.c plainly and ignore that redundant cast
>
> The patches in this series seem to be unrelated to each other, they
> shouldn't be numbered in order since there's no dependence. Just
> individual patches are fine.
>
you are right, i will provide a individual patch finnally
