net: skbuff: update comment about pfmemalloc propagating

__skb_fill_page_desc_noacc() is not doing any pfmemalloc
propagating, and yet it has a comment about that, commit
84ce071e38 ("net: introduce __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc")
may have accidentally moved it to __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc(),
so move it back to __skb_fill_page_desc() which is supposed
to be doing pfmemalloc propagating.

Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
CC: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230515050107.46397-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
This commit is contained in:
Yunsheng Lin 2023-05-15 13:01:07 +08:00 committed by Paolo Abeni
parent 0d9b41daa5
commit 8b33485128

View file

@ -2426,11 +2426,6 @@ static inline void __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc(struct skb_shared_info *shinfo,
{
skb_frag_t *frag = &shinfo->frags[i];
/*
* Propagate page pfmemalloc to the skb if we can. The problem is
* that not all callers have unique ownership of the page but rely
* on page_is_pfmemalloc doing the right thing(tm).
*/
skb_frag_fill_page_desc(frag, page, off, size);
}
@ -2463,6 +2458,11 @@ static inline void __skb_fill_page_desc(struct sk_buff *skb, int i,
struct page *page, int off, int size)
{
__skb_fill_page_desc_noacc(skb_shinfo(skb), i, page, off, size);
/* Propagate page pfmemalloc to the skb if we can. The problem is
* that not all callers have unique ownership of the page but rely
* on page_is_pfmemalloc doing the right thing(tm).
*/
page = compound_head(page);
if (page_is_pfmemalloc(page))
skb->pfmemalloc = true;