[Crash-utility] Re: PATCH] Fix "kmem -i" and "swap" commands on Linux 6.10-rc1 and later kernels

>     --- a/memory.c >     +++ b/memory.c >     @@ -16075,6 +16075,8 @@ dump_swap_info(ulong swapflags, ulong *totalswap_pages, ulong *totalused_pages) >              char buf3[BUFSIZE]; >              char buf4[BUFSIZE]; >              char buf5[BUFSIZE]; >     +       int swap_file_is_file = >     +               STREQ(MEMBER_TYPE_NAME("swap_info_struct", "swap_file"), "file"); > > > This patch looks good, but I still have one question: > The 'swap_file' has been added into the struct swap_info_struct since linux v2.6.12-rc2, > and until now it(its type) has been never changed, it indicates that the above checking is always true. > > STREQ(MEMBER_TYPE_NAME("swap_info_struct", "swap_file"), "file") > > Is that expected behavior? Just want to confirm with you. Yes. Thank you for the confirmation, and explanation below, Kazu. As far as I checked, swap_file was changed from 'dentry *' to 'file *' at somewhere between v2.4.0 and v2.6.0, so not always true.  Seems no full history in linux github. I checked it from the linux initial git repo: commit 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2 (tag: v2.6.12-rc2) Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)ppc970.osdl.org <mailto:torvalds@ppc970.osdl.org>> Date:   Sat Apr 16 15:20:36 2005 -0700     Linux-2.6.12-rc2     Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,     even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git     archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about     3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early     git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good     infrastructure for it.     Let it rip! get_pathname()'s first arg is dentry, we have to choose the else-if block without old_block_size, so I decided to use its type information directly                          } else if (VALID_MEMBER(swap_info_struct_old_block_size) ||                                      swap_file_is_file) { The other if / else blocks are for very old kernels, so maybe they won't be used, but if we don't remove these, I think this is a reasonable way. Sounds good to me. Does this answer your question? Yes. Thank you, Kazu. I have no other issues. For the patch: Ack.