* [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 8:36 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm, toshi.kani, linuxram, rientjes; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-mm
When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
[ 296.867031] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 296.922273] kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:3409!
[ 296.970229] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
[ 297.019453] Modules linked in: ebtable_nat ebtables xt_CHECKSUM iptable_mangle bridge stp llc ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler sunrpc ipt_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_defrag_ipv4 iptable_filter ip_tables ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv6 xt_state nf_conntrack ip6table_filter ip6_tables binfmt_misc vfat fat dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod vhost_net macvtap macvlan tun uinput iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support coretemp kvm_intel kvm crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel microcode pcspkr sg i2c_i801 lpc_ich mfd_core igb i2c_algo_bit i2c_core e1000e ptp pps_core tpm_infineon ioatdma dca sr_mod cdrom sd_mod crc_t10dif usb_storage megaraid_sas lpfc scsi_transport_fc scsi_tgt scsi_mod
[ 297.747808] CPU 0
[ 297.769764] Pid: 5091, comm: kworker/0:2 Tainted: G W 3.9.0-rc6+ #15
[ 297.897917] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff811c41d2>] [<ffffffff811c41d2>] kfree+0x232/0x240
[ 297.988634] RSP: 0018:ffff88084678d968 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 298.052196] RAX: 0060000000000400 RBX: ffff8987fffffea0 RCX: 0000000000000000
[ 298.137595] RDX: ffffffff8107a5ae RSI: 0000000000000001 RDI: ffff8987fffffea0
[ 298.222994] RBP: ffff88084678d998 R08: 0000000080000200 R09: 0000000000000001
[ 298.308390] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000030000000000
[ 298.393792] R13: ffffea061fffffc0 R14: 00000303ffffffff R15: 0000000000000080
[ 298.479190] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88085aa00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 298.576030] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 298.644791] CR2: 00000000025d3f78 CR3: 0000000001c0c000 CR4: 00000000001407f0
[ 298.730192] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 298.815590] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 298.900997] Process kworker/0:2 (pid: 5091, threadinfo ffff88084678c000, task ffff88083928ca80)
[ 299.005121] Stack:
[ 299.029156] 00000303ffffffff ffff8987fffffea0 0000030000000000 ffff8987fffffe90
[ 299.118116] 00000303ffffffff 0000000000000080 ffff88084678d9c8 ffffffff8107a5d4
[ 299.207084] 0000000030000000 ffff8987fffb2680 0000000000000080 0000000030000000
[ 299.296045] Call Trace:
[ 299.325288] [<ffffffff8107a5d4>] __release_region+0xd4/0xe0
[ 299.393020] [<ffffffff811c96f2>] __remove_pages+0x52/0x110
[ 299.459707] [<ffffffff816ada89>] arch_remove_memory+0x89/0xd0
[ 299.529505] [<ffffffff816aec94>] remove_memory+0xc4/0x100
[ 299.595145] [<ffffffff814103c5>] acpi_memory_device_remove+0x6d/0xb1
[ 299.672230] [<ffffffff813cbfe3>] acpi_device_remove+0x89/0xab
[ 299.742033] [<ffffffff81479f4c>] __device_release_driver+0x7c/0xf0
[ 299.817048] [<ffffffff8147a0cf>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
[ 299.889972] [<ffffffff813cce98>] acpi_bus_device_detach+0x6c/0x70
[ 299.963938] [<ffffffff813f80f6>] acpi_ns_walk_namespace+0x11a/0x250
[ 300.039982] [<ffffffff813cce2c>] ? power_state_show+0x36/0x36
[ 300.109800] [<ffffffff813cce2c>] ? power_state_show+0x36/0x36
[ 300.179612] [<ffffffff813f874d>] acpi_walk_namespace+0xee/0x137
[ 300.251492] [<ffffffff813ccecf>] acpi_bus_trim+0x33/0x7a
[ 300.316089] [<ffffffff816c182a>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x4a/0x60
[ 300.386927] [<ffffffff813cdca6>] acpi_bus_hot_remove_device+0xc4/0x1a1
[ 300.466096] [<ffffffff813c8009>] acpi_os_execute_deferred+0x27/0x34
[ 300.542137] [<ffffffff81093467>] process_one_work+0x1f7/0x590
[ 300.611940] [<ffffffff810933f5>] ? process_one_work+0x185/0x590
[ 300.683823] [<ffffffff81094bba>] worker_thread+0x11a/0x370
[ 300.750502] [<ffffffff81094aa0>] ? manage_workers+0x180/0x180
[ 300.820308] [<ffffffff8109adfe>] kthread+0xee/0x100
[ 300.879714] [<ffffffff810e139b>] ? __lock_release+0x12b/0x190
[ 300.949512] [<ffffffff8109ad10>] ? __init_kthread_worker+0x70/0x70
[ 301.024517] [<ffffffff816cf32c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
[ 301.089135] [<ffffffff8109ad10>] ? __init_kthread_worker+0x70/0x70
[ 301.164138] Code: 89 ef e8 c2 2c fb ff e9 0b ff ff ff 4d 8b 6d 30 e9 5c fe ff ff 4c 89 f1 48 89 da 4c 89 ee 4c 89 e7 e8 03 f9 ff ff e9 ec fe ff ff <0f> 0b eb fe 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 55 48 89 e5 48 83 ec
[ 301.397214] RIP [<ffffffff811c41d2>] kfree+0x232/0x240
[ 301.459855] RSP <ffff88084678d968>
[ 301.501675] ---[ end trace 8679967aa8606ed8 ]---
The reason why the messages are shown is to release a resource structure,
allocated by bootmem, by kfree(). So when we release a resource structure,
we should check whether it is allocated by bootmem or not.
But even if we know a resource structure is allocated by bootmem, we cannot
release it since SLxB cannot treat it. So for reusing a resource structure,
this patch remembers it by using bootmem_resource as follows:
When releasing a resource structure by free_resource(), free_resource() checks
whether the resource structure is allocated by bootmem or not. If it is
allocated by bootmem, free_resource() adds it to bootmem_resource. If it is
not allocated by bootmem, free_resource() release it by kfree().
And when getting a new resource structure by get_resource(), get_resource()
checks whether bootmem_resource has released resource structures or not. If
there is a released resource structure, get_resource() returns it. If there is
not a releaed resource structure, get_resource() returns new resource structure
allocated by kzalloc().
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
v4:
Use PageSlab() instead of PageReserved() for checking that released resource
structure is managed by Slub allocator
v3:
Change lock range in get_resource() for protecting bootmem_resource.sibling
v2:
Based on following Toshi's works:
Support memory hot-delete to boot memory
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/469
resource: Update config option of release_mem_region_adjustable()
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/11/694
Add a NULL check into free_resource()
Remove __free_resource()
---
kernel/resource.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
--- a/kernel/resource.c
+++ b/kernel/resource.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include <linux/seq_file.h>
#include <linux/device.h>
#include <linux/pfn.h>
+#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <asm/io.h>
@@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
+/*
+ * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
+ * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
+ * we need to remember the resource.
+ */
+struct resource bootmem_resource = {
+ .sibling = NULL,
+};
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
+
static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
{
struct resource *p = v;
@@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
#endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
+static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
+{
+ if (!res)
+ return;
+
+ if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
+ spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+ res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
+ bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
+ spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+ } else {
+ kfree(res);
+ }
+}
+
+static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
+{
+ struct resource *res = NULL;
+
+ spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+ if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
+ res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
+ bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
+ memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
+ }
+ spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+
+ if (!res)
+ res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
+
+ return res;
+}
+
/* Return the conflict entry if you can't request it */
static struct resource * __request_resource(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
{
@@ -771,7 +815,7 @@ static void __init __reserve_region_with_split(struct resource *root,
{
struct resource *parent = root;
struct resource *conflict;
- struct resource *res = kzalloc(sizeof(*res), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ struct resource *res = get_resource(GFP_ATOMIC);
struct resource *next_res = NULL;
if (!res)
@@ -796,7 +840,7 @@ static void __init __reserve_region_with_split(struct resource *root,
/* conflict covered whole area */
if (conflict->start <= res->start &&
conflict->end >= res->end) {
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
WARN_ON(next_res);
break;
}
@@ -806,10 +850,9 @@ static void __init __reserve_region_with_split(struct resource *root,
end = res->end;
res->end = conflict->start - 1;
if (conflict->end < end) {
- next_res = kzalloc(sizeof(*next_res),
- GFP_ATOMIC);
+ next_res = get_resource(GFP_ATOMIC);
if (!next_res) {
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
break;
}
next_res->name = name;
@@ -899,7 +942,7 @@ struct resource * __request_region(struct resource *parent,
const char *name, int flags)
{
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
- struct resource *res = kzalloc(sizeof(*res), GFP_KERNEL);
+ struct resource *res = get_resource(GFP_KERNEL);
if (!res)
return NULL;
@@ -933,7 +976,7 @@ struct resource * __request_region(struct resource *parent,
continue;
}
/* Uhhuh, that didn't work out.. */
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
res = NULL;
break;
}
@@ -967,7 +1010,7 @@ int __check_region(struct resource *parent, resource_size_t start,
return -EBUSY;
release_resource(res);
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
return 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__check_region);
@@ -1007,7 +1050,7 @@ void __release_region(struct resource *parent, resource_size_t start,
write_unlock(&resource_lock);
if (res->flags & IORESOURCE_MUXED)
wake_up(&muxed_resource_wait);
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
return;
}
p = &res->sibling;
@@ -1055,8 +1098,8 @@ int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
if ((start < parent->start) || (end > parent->end))
return ret;
- /* The kzalloc() result gets checked later */
- new_res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), GFP_KERNEL);
+ /* The get_resource() result gets checked later */
+ new_res = get_resource(GFP_KERNEL);
p = &parent->child;
write_lock(&resource_lock);
@@ -1083,7 +1126,7 @@ int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
if (res->start == start && res->end == end) {
/* free the whole entry */
*p = res->sibling;
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
ret = 0;
} else if (res->start == start && res->end != end) {
/* adjust the start */
@@ -1119,7 +1162,7 @@ int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
}
write_unlock(&resource_lock);
- kfree(new_res);
+ free_resource(new_res);
return ret;
}
#endif /* CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE */
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 8:36 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm, toshi.kani, linuxram, rientjes; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-mm
When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
[ 296.867031] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 296.922273] kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:3409!
[ 296.970229] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
[ 297.019453] Modules linked in: ebtable_nat ebtables xt_CHECKSUM iptable_mangle bridge stp llc ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler sunrpc ipt_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_defrag_ipv4 iptable_filter ip_tables ip6t_REJECT nf_conntrack_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv6 xt_state nf_conntrack ip6table_filter ip6_tables binfmt_misc vfat fat dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod vhost_net macvtap macvlan tun uinput iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support coretemp kvm_intel kvm crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel microcode pcspkr sg i2c_i801 lpc_ich mfd_core igb i2c_algo_bit i2c_core e1000e ptp pps_core tpm_infineon ioatdma dca sr_mod cdrom sd_mod crc_t10dif usb_storage megaraid_sas lpfc scsi_transport_fc scsi_tgt scsi_mod
[ 297.747808] CPU 0
[ 297.769764] Pid: 5091, comm: kworker/0:2 Tainted: G W 3.9.0-rc6+ #15
[ 297.897917] RIP: 0010:[<ffffffff811c41d2>] [<ffffffff811c41d2>] kfree+0x232/0x240
[ 297.988634] RSP: 0018:ffff88084678d968 EFLAGS: 00010246
[ 298.052196] RAX: 0060000000000400 RBX: ffff8987fffffea0 RCX: 0000000000000000
[ 298.137595] RDX: ffffffff8107a5ae RSI: 0000000000000001 RDI: ffff8987fffffea0
[ 298.222994] RBP: ffff88084678d998 R08: 0000000080000200 R09: 0000000000000001
[ 298.308390] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 0000030000000000
[ 298.393792] R13: ffffea061fffffc0 R14: 00000303ffffffff R15: 0000000000000080
[ 298.479190] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88085aa00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 298.576030] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 298.644791] CR2: 00000000025d3f78 CR3: 0000000001c0c000 CR4: 00000000001407f0
[ 298.730192] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 298.815590] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 298.900997] Process kworker/0:2 (pid: 5091, threadinfo ffff88084678c000, task ffff88083928ca80)
[ 299.005121] Stack:
[ 299.029156] 00000303ffffffff ffff8987fffffea0 0000030000000000 ffff8987fffffe90
[ 299.118116] 00000303ffffffff 0000000000000080 ffff88084678d9c8 ffffffff8107a5d4
[ 299.207084] 0000000030000000 ffff8987fffb2680 0000000000000080 0000000030000000
[ 299.296045] Call Trace:
[ 299.325288] [<ffffffff8107a5d4>] __release_region+0xd4/0xe0
[ 299.393020] [<ffffffff811c96f2>] __remove_pages+0x52/0x110
[ 299.459707] [<ffffffff816ada89>] arch_remove_memory+0x89/0xd0
[ 299.529505] [<ffffffff816aec94>] remove_memory+0xc4/0x100
[ 299.595145] [<ffffffff814103c5>] acpi_memory_device_remove+0x6d/0xb1
[ 299.672230] [<ffffffff813cbfe3>] acpi_device_remove+0x89/0xab
[ 299.742033] [<ffffffff81479f4c>] __device_release_driver+0x7c/0xf0
[ 299.817048] [<ffffffff8147a0cf>] device_release_driver+0x2f/0x50
[ 299.889972] [<ffffffff813cce98>] acpi_bus_device_detach+0x6c/0x70
[ 299.963938] [<ffffffff813f80f6>] acpi_ns_walk_namespace+0x11a/0x250
[ 300.039982] [<ffffffff813cce2c>] ? power_state_show+0x36/0x36
[ 300.109800] [<ffffffff813cce2c>] ? power_state_show+0x36/0x36
[ 300.179612] [<ffffffff813f874d>] acpi_walk_namespace+0xee/0x137
[ 300.251492] [<ffffffff813ccecf>] acpi_bus_trim+0x33/0x7a
[ 300.316089] [<ffffffff816c182a>] ? mutex_lock_nested+0x4a/0x60
[ 300.386927] [<ffffffff813cdca6>] acpi_bus_hot_remove_device+0xc4/0x1a1
[ 300.466096] [<ffffffff813c8009>] acpi_os_execute_deferred+0x27/0x34
[ 300.542137] [<ffffffff81093467>] process_one_work+0x1f7/0x590
[ 300.611940] [<ffffffff810933f5>] ? process_one_work+0x185/0x590
[ 300.683823] [<ffffffff81094bba>] worker_thread+0x11a/0x370
[ 300.750502] [<ffffffff81094aa0>] ? manage_workers+0x180/0x180
[ 300.820308] [<ffffffff8109adfe>] kthread+0xee/0x100
[ 300.879714] [<ffffffff810e139b>] ? __lock_release+0x12b/0x190
[ 300.949512] [<ffffffff8109ad10>] ? __init_kthread_worker+0x70/0x70
[ 301.024517] [<ffffffff816cf32c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
[ 301.089135] [<ffffffff8109ad10>] ? __init_kthread_worker+0x70/0x70
[ 301.164138] Code: 89 ef e8 c2 2c fb ff e9 0b ff ff ff 4d 8b 6d 30 e9 5c fe ff ff 4c 89 f1 48 89 da 4c 89 ee 4c 89 e7 e8 03 f9 ff ff e9 ec fe ff ff <0f> 0b eb fe 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 55 48 89 e5 48 83 ec
[ 301.397214] RIP [<ffffffff811c41d2>] kfree+0x232/0x240
[ 301.459855] RSP <ffff88084678d968>
[ 301.501675] ---[ end trace 8679967aa8606ed8 ]---
The reason why the messages are shown is to release a resource structure,
allocated by bootmem, by kfree(). So when we release a resource structure,
we should check whether it is allocated by bootmem or not.
But even if we know a resource structure is allocated by bootmem, we cannot
release it since SLxB cannot treat it. So for reusing a resource structure,
this patch remembers it by using bootmem_resource as follows:
When releasing a resource structure by free_resource(), free_resource() checks
whether the resource structure is allocated by bootmem or not. If it is
allocated by bootmem, free_resource() adds it to bootmem_resource. If it is
not allocated by bootmem, free_resource() release it by kfree().
And when getting a new resource structure by get_resource(), get_resource()
checks whether bootmem_resource has released resource structures or not. If
there is a released resource structure, get_resource() returns it. If there is
not a releaed resource structure, get_resource() returns new resource structure
allocated by kzalloc().
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
---
v4:
Use PageSlab() instead of PageReserved() for checking that released resource
structure is managed by Slub allocator
v3:
Change lock range in get_resource() for protecting bootmem_resource.sibling
v2:
Based on following Toshi's works:
Support memory hot-delete to boot memory
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/10/469
resource: Update config option of release_mem_region_adjustable()
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/4/11/694
Add a NULL check into free_resource()
Remove __free_resource()
---
kernel/resource.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
--- a/kernel/resource.c
+++ b/kernel/resource.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include <linux/seq_file.h>
#include <linux/device.h>
#include <linux/pfn.h>
+#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <asm/io.h>
@@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
+/*
+ * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
+ * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
+ * we need to remember the resource.
+ */
+struct resource bootmem_resource = {
+ .sibling = NULL,
+};
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
+
static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
{
struct resource *p = v;
@@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
#endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
+static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
+{
+ if (!res)
+ return;
+
+ if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
+ spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+ res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
+ bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
+ spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+ } else {
+ kfree(res);
+ }
+}
+
+static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
+{
+ struct resource *res = NULL;
+
+ spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+ if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
+ res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
+ bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
+ memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
+ }
+ spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+
+ if (!res)
+ res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
+
+ return res;
+}
+
/* Return the conflict entry if you can't request it */
static struct resource * __request_resource(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
{
@@ -771,7 +815,7 @@ static void __init __reserve_region_with_split(struct resource *root,
{
struct resource *parent = root;
struct resource *conflict;
- struct resource *res = kzalloc(sizeof(*res), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ struct resource *res = get_resource(GFP_ATOMIC);
struct resource *next_res = NULL;
if (!res)
@@ -796,7 +840,7 @@ static void __init __reserve_region_with_split(struct resource *root,
/* conflict covered whole area */
if (conflict->start <= res->start &&
conflict->end >= res->end) {
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
WARN_ON(next_res);
break;
}
@@ -806,10 +850,9 @@ static void __init __reserve_region_with_split(struct resource *root,
end = res->end;
res->end = conflict->start - 1;
if (conflict->end < end) {
- next_res = kzalloc(sizeof(*next_res),
- GFP_ATOMIC);
+ next_res = get_resource(GFP_ATOMIC);
if (!next_res) {
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
break;
}
next_res->name = name;
@@ -899,7 +942,7 @@ struct resource * __request_region(struct resource *parent,
const char *name, int flags)
{
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
- struct resource *res = kzalloc(sizeof(*res), GFP_KERNEL);
+ struct resource *res = get_resource(GFP_KERNEL);
if (!res)
return NULL;
@@ -933,7 +976,7 @@ struct resource * __request_region(struct resource *parent,
continue;
}
/* Uhhuh, that didn't work out.. */
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
res = NULL;
break;
}
@@ -967,7 +1010,7 @@ int __check_region(struct resource *parent, resource_size_t start,
return -EBUSY;
release_resource(res);
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
return 0;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__check_region);
@@ -1007,7 +1050,7 @@ void __release_region(struct resource *parent, resource_size_t start,
write_unlock(&resource_lock);
if (res->flags & IORESOURCE_MUXED)
wake_up(&muxed_resource_wait);
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
return;
}
p = &res->sibling;
@@ -1055,8 +1098,8 @@ int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
if ((start < parent->start) || (end > parent->end))
return ret;
- /* The kzalloc() result gets checked later */
- new_res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), GFP_KERNEL);
+ /* The get_resource() result gets checked later */
+ new_res = get_resource(GFP_KERNEL);
p = &parent->child;
write_lock(&resource_lock);
@@ -1083,7 +1126,7 @@ int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
if (res->start == start && res->end == end) {
/* free the whole entry */
*p = res->sibling;
- kfree(res);
+ free_resource(res);
ret = 0;
} else if (res->start == start && res->end != end) {
/* adjust the start */
@@ -1119,7 +1162,7 @@ int release_mem_region_adjustable(struct resource *parent,
}
write_unlock(&resource_lock);
- kfree(new_res);
+ free_resource(new_res);
return ret;
}
#endif /* CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTREMOVE */
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 8:36 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
@ 2013-04-18 13:42 ` Johannes Weiner
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Weiner @ 2013-04-18 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu
Cc: akpm, toshi.kani, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 05:36:12PM +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>
> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>
> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
> +{
> + if (!res)
> + return;
> +
> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + } else {
> + kfree(res);
> + }
The branch is mixed up, you are collecting slab objects in
bootmem_resource and kfreeing bootmem.
> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + struct resource *res = NULL;
> +
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> +
> + if (!res)
> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> +
> + return res;
> +}
> +
> /* Return the conflict entry if you can't request it */
> static struct resource * __request_resource(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
> {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 13:42 ` Johannes Weiner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Weiner @ 2013-04-18 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu
Cc: akpm, toshi.kani, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 05:36:12PM +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>
> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>
> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
> +{
> + if (!res)
> + return;
> +
> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + } else {
> + kfree(res);
> + }
The branch is mixed up, you are collecting slab objects in
bootmem_resource and kfreeing bootmem.
> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + struct resource *res = NULL;
> +
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> +
> + if (!res)
> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> +
> + return res;
> +}
> +
> /* Return the conflict entry if you can't request it */
> static struct resource * __request_resource(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
> {
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 8:36 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
@ 2013-04-18 14:23 ` Toshi Kani
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Toshi Kani @ 2013-04-18 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
:
> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
> --- a/kernel/resource.c
> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/pfn.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
> #include <asm/io.h>
>
>
> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>
> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>
> +/*
> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
> + * we need to remember the resource.
> + */
> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
> + .sibling = NULL,
> +};
This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
as:
static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
> +
> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
> {
> struct resource *p = v;
> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>
> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>
> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
> +{
> + if (!res)
> + return;
> +
> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + } else {
> + kfree(res);
> + }
> +}
I second with Johannes.
> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + struct resource *res = NULL;
> +
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
if (..) {
:
spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
} else {
spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
}
Thanks,
-Toshi
> +
> + if (!res)
> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> +
> + return res;
> +}
> +
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 14:23 ` Toshi Kani
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Toshi Kani @ 2013-04-18 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
:
> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
> --- a/kernel/resource.c
> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/pfn.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
> #include <asm/io.h>
>
>
> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>
> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>
> +/*
> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
> + * we need to remember the resource.
> + */
> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
> + .sibling = NULL,
> +};
This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
as:
static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
> +
> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
> {
> struct resource *p = v;
> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>
> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>
> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
> +{
> + if (!res)
> + return;
> +
> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + } else {
> + kfree(res);
> + }
> +}
I second with Johannes.
> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + struct resource *res = NULL;
> +
> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
if (..) {
:
spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
} else {
spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
}
Thanks,
-Toshi
> +
> + if (!res)
> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> +
> + return res;
> +}
> +
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 13:42 ` Johannes Weiner
@ 2013-04-18 23:21 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Weiner
Cc: akpm, toshi.kani, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
2013/04/18 22:42, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 05:36:12PM +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>
>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>> +{
>> + if (!res)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + } else {
>> + kfree(res);
>> + }
>
> The branch is mixed up, you are collecting slab objects in
> bootmem_resource and kfreeing bootmem.
Ah. I'm wrong. I'll update soon.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>> +{
>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> +
>> + if (!res)
>> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>> +
>> + return res;
>> +}
>> +
>> /* Return the conflict entry if you can't request it */
>> static struct resource * __request_resource(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
>> {
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 23:21 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 23:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Weiner
Cc: akpm, toshi.kani, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
2013/04/18 22:42, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 05:36:12PM +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>
>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>> +{
>> + if (!res)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + } else {
>> + kfree(res);
>> + }
>
> The branch is mixed up, you are collecting slab objects in
> bootmem_resource and kfreeing bootmem.
Ah. I'm wrong. I'll update soon.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>> +{
>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> +
>> + if (!res)
>> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>> +
>> + return res;
>> +}
>> +
>> /* Return the conflict entry if you can't request it */
>> static struct resource * __request_resource(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
>> {
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 23:33 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
@ 2013-04-18 23:28 ` Toshi Kani
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Toshi Kani @ 2013-04-18 23:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 08:33 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
:
> >
> >> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
> >> +{
> >> + struct resource *res = NULL;
> >> +
> >> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> >> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> >> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> >> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> >> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> >> + }
> >> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> >
>
> > I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
> >
> > spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> > if (..) {
> > :
> > spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> > memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> > } else {
> > spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> > res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> > }
>
> Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
>
> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> }
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>
> if (res)
> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> else
> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
Sounds good to me.
Thanks,
-Toshi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 23:28 ` Toshi Kani
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Toshi Kani @ 2013-04-18 23:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 08:33 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
:
> >
> >> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
> >> +{
> >> + struct resource *res = NULL;
> >> +
> >> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> >> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> >> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> >> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> >> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> >> + }
> >> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> >
>
> > I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
> >
> > spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> > if (..) {
> > :
> > spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> > memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> > } else {
> > spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> > res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> > }
>
> Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
>
> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> }
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>
> if (res)
> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> else
> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
Sounds good to me.
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 14:23 ` Toshi Kani
@ 2013-04-18 23:33 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
Hi Toshi,
2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
> :
>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>> #include <linux/device.h>
>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>
>>
>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>
>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>
>> +/*
>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>> + */
>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
>> + .sibling = NULL,
>> +};
>
> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
> as:
>
> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
O.K. I'll update it.
>
>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
>> +
>> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>> {
>> struct resource *p = v;
>> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>
>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>> +{
>> + if (!res)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + } else {
>> + kfree(res);
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I second with Johannes.
I'll update it.
>
>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>> +{
>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>
> I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
>
> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> if (..) {
> :
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> } else {
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> }
Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
}
spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
if (res)
memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
else
res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
>> +
>> +
>> + return res;
>> +}
>> +
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 23:33 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
Hi Toshi,
2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
> :
>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>> #include <linux/device.h>
>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>
>>
>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>
>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>
>> +/*
>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>> + */
>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
>> + .sibling = NULL,
>> +};
>
> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
> as:
>
> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
O.K. I'll update it.
>
>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
>> +
>> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>> {
>> struct resource *p = v;
>> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>
>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>> +{
>> + if (!res)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + } else {
>> + kfree(res);
>> + }
>> +}
>
> I second with Johannes.
I'll update it.
>
>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>> +{
>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>
> I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
>
> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> if (..) {
> :
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> } else {
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
> }
Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
}
spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
if (res)
memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
else
res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
>> +
>> +
>> + return res;
>> +}
>> +
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 23:28 ` Toshi Kani
@ 2013-04-18 23:43 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
2013/04/19 8:28, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 08:33 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> :
>>>
>>>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>>>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>>>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>>>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>>> + }
>>>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>>
>>
>>> I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
>>>
>>> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> if (..) {
>>> :
>>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>> } else {
>>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>>> }
>>
>> Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
>>
>> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>> res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>> }
>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>
>> if (res)
>> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> else
>> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>
> Sounds good to me.
Great. I'll update it.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-18 23:43 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-18 23:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
2013/04/19 8:28, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 08:33 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> :
>>>
>>>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>>>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>>>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>>>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>>> + }
>>>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>>
>>
>>> I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
>>>
>>> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> if (..) {
>>> :
>>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>> } else {
>>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>>> }
>>
>> Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
>>
>> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>> res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>> bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>> }
>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>
>> if (res)
>> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> else
>> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>
> Sounds good to me.
Great. I'll update it.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-18 23:33 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
@ 2013-04-19 8:09 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-19 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
Hi Toshi,
2013/04/19 8:33, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> Hi Toshi,
>
> 2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
>> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
>> :
>>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
>>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>>
>>>
>>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>>
>>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>>> + */
>>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
>>> + .sibling = NULL,
>>> +};
>>
>
>> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
>> as:
>>
>> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>
> O.K. I'll update it.
Oh, I missed "should be pointer of struct resource" part.
Please teach me your detailed idea. If this is defined as pointer,
how do we initialize this and manage bootmem resources?
I'm thinking it but have no idea.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>>
>>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> +
>>> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>>> {
>>> struct resource *p = v;
>>> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>>
>>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>>
>>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>>> +{
>>> + if (!res)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
>>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> + } else {
>>> + kfree(res);
>>> + }
>>> +}
>>
>
>> I second with Johannes.
>
> I'll update it.
>
>>
>>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>>> +{
>>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>> + }
>>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>
>
>> I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
>>
>> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> if (..) {
>> :
>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> } else {
>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>> }
>
> Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
>
> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> }
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>
> if (res)
> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> else
> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>
> Thanks,
> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Toshi
>>
>>> +
>>> +
>>> + return res;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-19 8:09 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-19 8:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
Hi Toshi,
2013/04/19 8:33, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> Hi Toshi,
>
> 2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
>> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
>> :
>>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
>>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>>
>>>
>>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>>
>>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>>> + */
>>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
>>> + .sibling = NULL,
>>> +};
>>
>
>> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
>> as:
>>
>> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>
> O.K. I'll update it.
Oh, I missed "should be pointer of struct resource" part.
Please teach me your detailed idea. If this is defined as pointer,
how do we initialize this and manage bootmem resources?
I'm thinking it but have no idea.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>>
>>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> +
>>> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>>> {
>>> struct resource *p = v;
>>> @@ -151,6 +162,39 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>>
>>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>>
>>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>>> +{
>>> + if (!res)
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + if (PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res;
>>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> + } else {
>>> + kfree(res);
>>> + }
>>> +}
>>
>
>> I second with Johannes.
>
> I'll update it.
>
>>
>>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>>> +{
>>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>> + if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
>>> + res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
>>> + bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
>>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>> + }
>>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>>
>
>> I prefer to keep memset() outside of the spin lock.
>>
>> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> if (..) {
>> :
>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> } else {
>> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>> }
>
> Hmm. It is a little ugly. How about it?
>
> spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
> if (bootmem_resource.sibling) {
> res = bootmem_resource.sibling;
> bootmem_resource.sibling = res->sibling;
> }
> spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>
> if (res)
> memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
> else
> res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>
> Thanks,
> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Toshi
>>
>>> +
>>> +
>>> + return res;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-19 8:09 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
@ 2013-04-19 14:30 ` Toshi Kani
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Toshi Kani @ 2013-04-19 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:09 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> Hi Toshi,
>
> 2013/04/19 8:33, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> > Hi Toshi,
> >
> > 2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> >>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
> >> :
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
> >>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> >>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> >>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> >>> #include <linux/device.h>
> >>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
> >>> #include <asm/io.h>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
> >>>
> >>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
> >>>
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
> >>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
> >>> + * we need to remember the resource.
> >>> + */
> >>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
> >>> + .sibling = NULL,
> >>> +};
> >>
> >
>
> >> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
> >> as:
> >>
> >> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
> >
> > O.K. I'll update it.
>
> Oh, I missed "should be pointer of struct resource" part.
> Please teach me your detailed idea. If this is defined as pointer,
> how do we initialize this and manage bootmem resources?
>
> I'm thinking it but have no idea.
Sure. It's quite simple. Since only bootmem_resource.sibling is used,
it can be replaced with a pointer, such as bootmem_resource_free. This
avoids allocating a struct resource table as this code is supposed to
save memory.
So, first, declare the pointer below, which is initialized to NULL as
BSS (checkpatch.pl complains if you set it to NULL explicitly).
static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
Then, in free_resource(), this pointer replaces bootmem_resource.sibling
as follows.
res->sibling = bootmem_resource_free;
bootmem_resource_free = res;
Similarly, in get_resource().
if (bootmem_resource_free) {
res = bootmem_resource_free;
bootmem_resource_free = res->sibling;
}
Thanks,
-Toshi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-19 14:30 ` Toshi Kani
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Toshi Kani @ 2013-04-19 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yasuaki Ishimatsu; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:09 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> Hi Toshi,
>
> 2013/04/19 8:33, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> > Hi Toshi,
> >
> > 2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> >>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
> >> :
> >>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
> >>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
> >>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
> >>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> >>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> >>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> >>> #include <linux/device.h>
> >>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
> >>> #include <asm/io.h>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
> >>>
> >>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
> >>>
> >>> +/*
> >>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
> >>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
> >>> + * we need to remember the resource.
> >>> + */
> >>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
> >>> + .sibling = NULL,
> >>> +};
> >>
> >
>
> >> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
> >> as:
> >>
> >> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
> >
> > O.K. I'll update it.
>
> Oh, I missed "should be pointer of struct resource" part.
> Please teach me your detailed idea. If this is defined as pointer,
> how do we initialize this and manage bootmem resources?
>
> I'm thinking it but have no idea.
Sure. It's quite simple. Since only bootmem_resource.sibling is used,
it can be replaced with a pointer, such as bootmem_resource_free. This
avoids allocating a struct resource table as this code is supposed to
save memory.
So, first, declare the pointer below, which is initialized to NULL as
BSS (checkpatch.pl complains if you set it to NULL explicitly).
static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
Then, in free_resource(), this pointer replaces bootmem_resource.sibling
as follows.
res->sibling = bootmem_resource_free;
bootmem_resource_free = res;
Similarly, in get_resource().
if (bootmem_resource_free) {
res = bootmem_resource_free;
bootmem_resource_free = res->sibling;
}
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
2013-04-19 14:30 ` Toshi Kani
@ 2013-04-23 0:19 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-23 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
2013/04/19 23:30, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:09 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> Hi Toshi,
>>
>> 2013/04/19 8:33, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>> Hi Toshi,
>>>
>>> 2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>>>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
>>>> :
>>>>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
>>>>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
>>>>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>>>>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>>>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>>>>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>>>>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>>>>
>>>>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>>>>
>>>>> +/*
>>>>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>>>>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>>>>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
>>>>> + .sibling = NULL,
>>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>>> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
>>>> as:
>>>>
>>>> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>>>
>>> O.K. I'll update it.
>>
>> Oh, I missed "should be pointer of struct resource" part.
>> Please teach me your detailed idea. If this is defined as pointer,
>> how do we initialize this and manage bootmem resources?
>>
>> I'm thinking it but have no idea.
>
> Sure. It's quite simple. Since only bootmem_resource.sibling is used,
> it can be replaced with a pointer, such as bootmem_resource_free. This
> avoids allocating a struct resource table as this code is supposed to
> save memory.
>
> So, first, declare the pointer below, which is initialized to NULL as
> BSS (checkpatch.pl complains if you set it to NULL explicitly).
>
> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>
> Then, in free_resource(), this pointer replaces bootmem_resource.sibling
> as follows.
>
> res->sibling = bootmem_resource_free;
> bootmem_resource_free = res;
>
> Similarly, in get_resource().
>
> if (bootmem_resource_free) {
> res = bootmem_resource_free;
> bootmem_resource_free = res->sibling;
> }
Thank you for your detail explanation. I clearly understood your idea.
I'll update your comment and post a updated patch.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
@ 2013-04-23 0:19 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu @ 2013-04-23 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Toshi Kani; +Cc: akpm, linuxram, rientjes, linux-kernel, linux-mm
2013/04/19 23:30, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:09 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>> Hi Toshi,
>>
>> 2013/04/19 8:33, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>> Hi Toshi,
>>>
>>> 2013/04/18 23:23, Toshi Kani wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 17:36 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>>>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
>>>> :
>>>>> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
>>>>> index 4aef886..637e8d2 100644
>>>>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>>>>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>>>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>>>>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>>>>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -50,6 +51,16 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>>>>
>>>>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>>>>
>>>>> +/*
>>>>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>>>>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>>>>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +struct resource bootmem_resource = {
>>>>> + .sibling = NULL,
>>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>>> This should be a pointer of struct resource and declared as static, such
>>>> as:
>>>>
>>>> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>>>
>>> O.K. I'll update it.
>>
>> Oh, I missed "should be pointer of struct resource" part.
>> Please teach me your detailed idea. If this is defined as pointer,
>> how do we initialize this and manage bootmem resources?
>>
>> I'm thinking it but have no idea.
>
> Sure. It's quite simple. Since only bootmem_resource.sibling is used,
> it can be replaced with a pointer, such as bootmem_resource_free. This
> avoids allocating a struct resource table as this code is supposed to
> save memory.
>
> So, first, declare the pointer below, which is initialized to NULL as
> BSS (checkpatch.pl complains if you set it to NULL explicitly).
>
> static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>
> Then, in free_resource(), this pointer replaces bootmem_resource.sibling
> as follows.
>
> res->sibling = bootmem_resource_free;
> bootmem_resource_free = res;
>
> Similarly, in get_resource().
>
> if (bootmem_resource_free) {
> res = bootmem_resource_free;
> bootmem_resource_free = res->sibling;
> }
Thank you for your detail explanation. I clearly understood your idea.
I'll update your comment and post a updated patch.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-04-23 0:19 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-04-18 8:36 [Bug fix PATCH v4] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 8:36 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 13:42 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-18 13:42 ` Johannes Weiner
2013-04-18 23:21 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 23:21 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 14:23 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-18 14:23 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-18 23:33 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 23:33 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 23:28 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-18 23:28 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-18 23:43 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-18 23:43 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-19 8:09 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-19 8:09 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-19 14:30 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-19 14:30 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-23 0:19 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-23 0:19 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.