Re: [PATCH V2] arm64/hugetlb: Define __hugetlb_valid_size()

[Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>]

On 2/15/22 10:18 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 04:46:10PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> arch_hugetlb_valid_size() can be just factored out to create another helper
>> to be used in arch_hugetlb_migration_supported() as well. This just defines
>> __hugetlb_valid_size() for that purpose.
>>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
>> ---
>> This applies on v5.17-rc3
>>
>> Changes in V2:
>>
>> - s/arm64_hugetlb_valid_size/__hugetlb_valid_size per Catalin
>> - Restored back warning in arch_hugetlb_migration_supported() per Catalin
>> - Updated the commit message subject line as required
>>
>> Changes in V1:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/1644197468-26755-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/
>>
>>  arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>> index ffb9c229610a..72ed07fe2c84 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>> @@ -56,24 +56,19 @@ void __init arm64_hugetlb_cma_reserve(void)
>>  }
>>  #endif /* CONFIG_CMA */
>>  
>> +static bool __hugetlb_valid_size(unsigned long size);
> 
> Why not reorder the code to avoid this forward declaration?

That will create more code churn, which I tried to avoid.