Re: [PATCH 2/3] io_uring/rsrc: clean up io_coalesce_buffer()

[Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>]

On 4/21/25 5:50 AM, Nitesh Shetty wrote:
> On 19/04/25 06:47PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> We don't need special handling for the first page in
>> io_coalesce_buffer(), move it inside the loop.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> io_uring/rsrc.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/io_uring/rsrc.c b/io_uring/rsrc.c
>> index 40061a31cc1f..21613e6074d4 100644
>> --- a/io_uring/rsrc.c
>> +++ b/io_uring/rsrc.c
>> @@ -685,37 +685,34 @@ static bool io_coalesce_buffer(struct page ***pages, int *nr_pages,
>>                 struct io_imu_folio_data *data)
>> {
>>     struct page **page_array = *pages, **new_array = NULL;
>> -    int nr_pages_left = *nr_pages, i, j;
>> -    int nr_folios = data->nr_folios;
>> +    unsigned nr_pages_left = *nr_pages;
>> +    unsigned nr_folios = data->nr_folios;
>> +    unsigned i, j;
> checkpatch.pl complains about just "unsigned", "unsigned int" is preferred.
> 
>>
>>     /* Store head pages only*/
>> -    new_array = kvmalloc_array(nr_folios, sizeof(struct page *),
>> -                    GFP_KERNEL);
>> +    new_array = kvmalloc_array(nr_folios, sizeof(struct page *), GFP_KERNEL);
> Not sure whether 80 line length is preferred in uring subsystem, if yes
> then this breaks it.

It's fine to use checkpatch for new contributors, but it's generally
just pretty useless imho. io_uring does exceed 80 chars regularly, if it
improves readability. And we also do use unsigned, not sure why
checkpatch is against that.

-- 
Jens Axboe