Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 13 Jun 2022 09:05:59 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 03/13] mm/demotion: Return error on write to numa_demotion sysfs | From | Aneesh Kumar K V <> |
| |
On 6/13/22 8:56 AM, Ying Huang wrote: > On Fri, 2022-06-10 at 19:22 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >> With CONFIG_MIGRATION disabled return EINVAL on write. >> >> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> >> --- >> mm/memory-tiers.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/mm/memory-tiers.c b/mm/memory-tiers.c >> index 9c6b40d7e0bf..c3123a457d90 100644 >> --- a/mm/memory-tiers.c >> +++ b/mm/memory-tiers.c >> @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ static ssize_t numa_demotion_enabled_store(struct kobject *kobj, >> { >> ssize_t ret; >> >> >> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MIGRATION)) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + > > How about enclose numa_demotion_enabled_xxx related code with CONFIG_MIGRATION? >
IIUC there is a desire to use IS_ENABLED() in the kernel instead of #ifdef since that helps in more compile time checks. Because there are no dead codes during compile now with IS_ENABLED().
W.r.t leaving the sysfs file visible even when CONFIG_MIGRATION is disabled, I was thinking it gives better visibility into numa_demotion status. I could switch to hide numa_demotion file if that is desirable.
>> ret = kstrtobool(buf, &numa_demotion_enabled); >> if (ret) >> return ret; >
-aneesh
| |