On 28/03/2018 12:20, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Laurent Dufour wrote: > >>>> @@ -2913,7 +2921,8 @@ int do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf) >>>> int exclusive = 0; >>>> int ret = 0; >>> >>> Initialization is now unneeded. >> >> I'm sorry, what "initialization" are you talking about here ? >> > > The initialization of the ret variable. > > @@ -2913,7 +2921,8 @@ int do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf) > int exclusive = 0; > int ret = 0; > > - if (!pte_unmap_same(vma->vm_mm, vmf->pmd, vmf->pte, vmf->orig_pte)) > + ret = pte_unmap_same(vmf); > + if (ret) > goto out; > > entry = pte_to_swp_entry(vmf->orig_pte); > > "ret" is immediately set to the return value of pte_unmap_same(), so there > is no need to initialize it to 0.
Sorry, I missed that. I'll remove this initialization. Thanks, Laurent.
