linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
	trivial@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] mm/memblock.c: trivial code refine in memblock_is_region_memory()
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:35:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161220163540.GA13224@vultr.guest> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161219151514.GB5175@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 04:15:14PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>On Sun 18-12-16 14:47:49, Wei Yang wrote:
>> The base address is already guaranteed to be in the region by
>> memblock_search().
>

Hi, Michal

Nice to receive your comment.

>First of all the way how the check is removed is the worst possible...
>Apart from that it is really not clear to me why checking the base
>is not needed. You are mentioning memblock_search but what about other
>callers? adjust_range_page_size_mask e.g...
>

Hmm... the memblock_search() is called by memblock_is_region_memory(). Maybe I
paste the whole function here would clarify the change.

int __init_memblock memblock_is_region_memory(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
{
	int idx = memblock_search(&memblock.memory, base);
	phys_addr_t end = base + memblock_cap_size(base, &size);

	if (idx == -1)
		return 0;
	return memblock.memory.regions[idx].base <= base &&
		(memblock.memory.regions[idx].base +
		 memblock.memory.regions[idx].size) >= end;
}

So memblock_search() will search "base" in memblock.memory. If "base" is not
in memblock.memory, idx would be -1. Then following code will not be executed.

And if the following code is executed, it means idx is not -1 and
memblock_search() has found the "base" in memblock.memory.regions[idx], which
is ture for statement (memblock.memory.regions[idx].base <= base).

>You also didn't mention what is the motivation of this change? What will
>work better or why it makes sense in general?
>

The purpose is to improve the code by reduce an extra check.

>Also this seems to be a general purpose function so it should better
>be robust.
>

I think it is as robust as it was.

>> This patch removes the check on base.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
>
>Without a proper justification and with the horrible way how it is done
>Nacked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>

Not sure I make it clear or I may miss something?

>> ---
>>  mm/memblock.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
>> index 7608bc3..cd85303 100644
>> --- a/mm/memblock.c
>> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
>> @@ -1615,7 +1615,7 @@ int __init_memblock memblock_is_region_memory(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size
>>  
>>  	if (idx == -1)
>>  		return 0;
>> -	return memblock.memory.regions[idx].base <= base &&
>> +	return /* memblock.memory.regions[idx].base <= base && */
>>  		(memblock.memory.regions[idx].base +
>>  		 memblock.memory.regions[idx].size) >= end;
>>  }
>> -- 
>> 2.5.0
>> 
>> --
>> 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>
>
>-- 
>Michal Hocko
>SUSE Labs

-- 
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me

  reply	other threads:[~2016-12-20 16:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-18 14:47 [PATCH V2 0/2] mm/memblock.c: fix potential bug and code refine Wei Yang
2016-12-18 14:47 ` [PATCH V2 1/2] mm/memblock.c: trivial code refine in memblock_is_region_memory() Wei Yang
2016-12-19 15:15   ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-20 16:35     ` Wei Yang [this message]
2016-12-21  7:48       ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-21 12:43         ` Wei Yang
2016-12-21 12:48           ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-21 13:15             ` Wei Yang
2016-12-18 14:47 ` [PATCH V2 2/2] mm/memblock.c: check return value of memblock_reserve() in memblock_virt_alloc_internal() Wei Yang
2016-12-19 15:21   ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-20 16:48     ` Wei Yang
2016-12-21  7:51       ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-21 13:13         ` Wei Yang
2016-12-21 13:22           ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-21 14:39             ` Wei Yang
2016-12-21 14:52               ` Michal Hocko

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=20161220163540.GA13224@vultr.guest \
    --to=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=trivial@kernel.org \
    /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).