linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Cc: mhocko@suse.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
	pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com,
	anshuman.khandual@arm.com, vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] drivers/base/memory: Remove unneeded check in remove_memory_block_devices
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:01:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e820fee-f82f-3336-ff34-31c66dbbbbfe@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190625075227.15193-2-osalvador@suse.de>

On 25.06.19 09:52, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> remove_memory_block_devices() checks for the range to be aligned
> to memory_block_size_bytes, which is our current memory block size,
> and WARNs_ON and bails out if it is not.
> 
> This is the right to do, but we do already do that in try_remove_memory(),
> where remove_memory_block_devices() gets called from, and we even are
> more strict in try_remove_memory, since we directly BUG_ON in case the range
> is not properly aligned.
> 
> Since remove_memory_block_devices() is only called from try_remove_memory(),
> we can safely drop the check here.
> 
> To be honest, I am not sure if we should kill the system in case we cannot
> remove memory.
> I tend to think that WARN_ON and return and error is better.

I failed to parse this sentence.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
> ---
>  drivers/base/memory.c | 4 ----
>  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/memory.c b/drivers/base/memory.c
> index 826dd76f662e..07ba731beb42 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/memory.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/memory.c
> @@ -771,10 +771,6 @@ void remove_memory_block_devices(unsigned long start, unsigned long size)
>  	struct memory_block *mem;
>  	int block_id;
>  
> -	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(start, memory_block_size_bytes()) ||
> -			 !IS_ALIGNED(size, memory_block_size_bytes())))
> -		return;
> -
>  	mutex_lock(&mem_sysfs_mutex);
>  	for (block_id = start_block_id; block_id != end_block_id; block_id++) {
>  		mem = find_memory_block_by_id(block_id, NULL);
> 

As I said when I introduced this, I prefer to have such duplicate checks
in place in case we have dependent code splattered over different files.
(especially mm/ vs. drivers/base). Such simple checks avoid to document
"start and size have to be aligned to memory blocks".

If you still insist, then also remove the same sequence from
create_memory_block_devices().

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb


  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-25  8:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-25  7:52 [PATCH v2 0/5] Allocate memmap from hotadded memory Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  7:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] drivers/base/memory: Remove unneeded check in remove_memory_block_devices Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  8:01   ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2019-06-25  8:03     ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-25  8:09       ` Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  8:27         ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-25  7:52 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm,memory_hotplug: Introduce MHP_VMEMMAP_FLAGS Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  8:31   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-24 20:11   ` Dan Williams
2019-07-24 21:36     ` osalvador
2019-07-25  9:27     ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-25  9:30       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-25  9:40         ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-25 10:04           ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-25 10:13             ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-25 10:15               ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-25  7:52 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm,memory_hotplug: Introduce Vmemmap page helpers Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25 10:28   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-26  9:48     ` Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  7:52 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm,memory_hotplug: allocate memmap from the added memory range for sparse-vmemmap Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  8:49   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-26  8:13     ` Oscar Salvador
2019-06-26  8:15       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-26  8:17   ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-06-26  8:28     ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-24 21:49   ` Dan Williams
2019-06-25  7:52 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm,memory_hotplug: Allow userspace to enable/disable vmemmap Oscar Salvador
2019-06-25  8:25 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Allocate memmap from hotadded memory David Hildenbrand
2019-06-25  8:33   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-26  8:03   ` Oscar Salvador
2019-06-26  8:11     ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-26  8:15       ` Oscar Salvador
2019-06-26  8:27         ` Oscar Salvador
2019-06-26  8:37           ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-26  8:28         ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-02  6:42           ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-07-02  7:48             ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-02  8:52               ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-07-10  1:14                 ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-07-31 12:08                 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-31 23:06                   ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-08-01  7:17                     ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  7:18                       ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  7:24                         ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  7:26                           ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  7:31                             ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  7:39                               ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  7:48                                 ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  9:18                                   ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  7:34                             ` Michal Hocko
2019-08-01  7:50                               ` David Hildenbrand
2019-08-01  8:04                                 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-16 12:28             ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-29  5:42               ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-07-29  8:06                 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-30  7:08                   ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-07-31  2:21                   ` Rashmica Gupta
2019-07-31  9:39                     ` David Hildenbrand

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3e820fee-f82f-3336-ff34-31c66dbbbbfe@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).