Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] mm: huge_memory: refactor enabled_store() with change_enabled()

[Breno Leitao]

On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 11:25:23AM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle) wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 04:23:37AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 09:37:39AM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle) wrote:
> > >
> > > Given the above I think we should switch back to the atomic accessors.
> > >
> > > We can address the broader issues with this horrible code in a separate
> > > series.
> >
> > Ack. let me respin then.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> >
> > > > Overall, as you mentioned below, protecting transparent_hugepage_flags
> > > > with a spinlock seems like a better, long-term solution to me as well.
> > >
> > > Yeah, let's look at doing a follow up that cleans this up in general and
> > > address that then.
> >
> > Sure. I am planning to improve defrag_store() as the next work, and then
> > come up with this additional spinlock for transparent_hugepage_flags.
> >
> 
> To be clear by the way by 'horrible code' I meant the existing logic with the
> globals etc. not your change which is positive and welcome :)

lol. Not once did it cross my mind that you might be referring to my
changes. I have never written horrible code in my life. :-P