[PATCH V2] arm64/hugetlb: Define __hugetlb_valid_size()

[Anshuman Khandual]

On 2/16/22 6:00 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 05:09:12AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/15/22 10:18 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 04:46:10PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>>> arch_hugetlb_valid_size() can be just factored out to create another helper
>>>> to be used in arch_hugetlb_migration_supported() as well. This just defines
>>>> __hugetlb_valid_size() for that purpose.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
>>>> Cc: Will Deacon <will at kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>>>> Cc: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual at arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> This applies on v5.17-rc3
>>>>
>>>> Changes in V2:
>>>>
>>>> - s/arm64_hugetlb_valid_size/__hugetlb_valid_size per Catalin
>>>> - Restored back warning in arch_hugetlb_migration_supported() per Catalin
>>>> - Updated the commit message subject line as required
>>>>
>>>> Changes in V1:
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/1644197468-26755-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/
>>>>
>>>>  arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>>>>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>>>> index ffb9c229610a..72ed07fe2c84 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>>>> @@ -56,24 +56,19 @@ void __init arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void)
>>>>  }
>>>>  #endif /* CONFIG_CMA */
>>>>  
>>>> +static bool __hugetlb_valid_size(unsigned long size);
>>>
>>> Why not reorder the code to avoid this forward declaration?
>>
>> That will create more code churn, which I tried to avoid.
> 
> Isn't it just moving a handful of lines further up in the file? What's
> the problem with that?

No problem as such, will change and resend.