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
84ce071e38a6 ("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>

diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
index 00e8c43..4b8d552 100644 (file)
--- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
+++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
@@ -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;