[PATCH RFC 00/14] Remove PG_private by using page/folio->private checks instead

[Jürgen Groß]

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 3683 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/attachments/20260803/c412bb84/attachment.bin>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/attachments/20260803/c412bb84/attachment.sig>