Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] mm: introduce vma_flags_can_grow() and vma_can_grow()

"Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.xenproject.lists.xen-devel,dev.linux.lists.virtualization,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-xe,org.freedesktop.lists.nouveau,org.kernel.vger.linux-arm-msm,org.kernel.vger.linux-fbdev,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-mips,org.kernel.vger.linux-samsung-soc,org.kernel.vger.linux-sound,org.kernel.vger.linux-tegra,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 7/11/26 20:44, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> These test whether the VMA has stack semantics, i.e. is able to grow
> upwards or downwards depending on the architecture.
> 
> In order to account for arches which do not support upward-growing stacks,
> introduce VMA_GROWSUP whose definition depends on the architecture
> supporting it, and use vma_flags_test_single_mask() in vma_flags_can_grow()
> to account for this.
> 
> No functional change intended.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Lance Yang <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <[email protected]>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.