If you are adding PageOffline(page) to the condition list of the already
existing if in
saveable_highmem_page(), why explicitly add it as a separate statement in
saveable_page()?
It would seem more consistent to make the second check:
- if (swsusp_page_is_forbidden(page) || swsusp_page_is_free(page))
+ if (swsusp_page_is_forbidden(page) || swsusp_page_is_free(page) ||
+ PageOffline(page))
instead.
It's admittedly a nit but it just seems cleaner to either do that or, if your
intention
was to separate the Page checks from the swsusp checks, to break the calls to
PageReserved() and PageOffline() into their own check in
saveable_highmem_page().
Thanks!
-- Bill
> On Nov 19, 2018, at 3:16 AM, David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> --- a/kernel/power/snapshot.c
> +++ b/kernel/power/snapshot.c
> @@ -1222,7 +1222,7 @@ static struct page *saveable_highmem_page(struct zone
> *zone, unsigned long pfn)
> BUG_ON(!PageHighMem(page));
>
> if (swsusp_page_is_forbidden(page) || swsusp_page_is_free(page) ||
> - PageReserved(page))
> + PageReserved(page) || PageOffline(page))
> return NULL;
>
> if (page_is_guard(page))
> @@ -1286,6 +1286,9 @@ static struct page *saveable_page(struct zone *zone,
> unsigned long pfn)
> if (swsusp_page_is_forbidden(page) || swsusp_page_is_free(page))
> return NULL;
>
> + if (PageOffline(page))
> + return NULL;
> +
> if (PageReserved(page)
> && (!kernel_page_present(page) || pfn_is_nosave(pfn)))
> return NULL;
> --
> 2.17.2
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
