Re: Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in pg_buffercache_pages while scanning the buffers

On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 12:04 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 2:33 AM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Masahiko,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 4:57 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 8, 2025 at 2:59 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 4:31 PM SATYANARAYANA NARLAPURAM
> >> > <satyanarlapuram(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Please find attached patch that adds CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS while
> scanning the buffers in pg_buffercache_pages. I checked other functions in
> the module and this check already exists in pg_buffercache_numa_pages.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you for the patch!
> >> >
> >> > I think the patch is reasonable and it looks good to me. I'll push it
> >> > to master early next week, barring objections.
> >>
> >> After reviewing this patch more, I'm leaning toward to backpatch this
> >> change. The patch adds CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() to
> >> pg_buffercache_pages(), pg_buffercache_summary(), and
> >> pg_buffercache_usage_counts(), and the latter two functions were
> >> introduced in v16. Therefore, for v15 or older we can add CFI to only
> >> pg_buffercache_pages() and apply this patch to v16 or newer. Thoughts?
> >
> >
> > Thanks for reviewing the patch. Sounds good to me.
>
> Could you provide patches also for back branches? or shall I?
>

Attached the patch for v15 and below. Please let me know if you need
anything.

Thanks,
Satya