Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The NULL checking here doesn't make sense, so it causes a static checker
> warning. It turns out that p->mm can't be NULL so the inconsistency is
> harmless and we should just remove the check.
Commit 77ed2c5745d9 ("android,lowmemorykiller: Don't abuse TIF_MEMDIE.")
replaced test_tsk_thread_flag(p, TIF_MEMDIE) with task_lmk_waiting(p) && p->mm
because TIF_MEMDIE is cleared after p->mm became NULL whereas
PFA_LMK_WAITING is not cleared after p->mm became NULL.
But p is a thread which is guaranteed to be p->mm != NULL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@oracle.com>
Acked-by: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
> b/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
> index c79f224..24d2745 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/android/lowmemorykiller.c
> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static unsigned long lowmem_scan(struct shrinker *s,
> struct shrink_control *sc)
> if (!p)
> continue;
>
> - if (task_lmk_waiting(p) && p->mm &&
> + if (task_lmk_waiting(p) &&
> time_before_eq(jiffies, lowmem_deathpending_timeout)) {
> task_unlock(p);
> rcu_read_unlock();
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
