From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
Ilho Lee <ilho215.lee@samsung.com>,
KeyYoung Park <keyyoung.park@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mm: Regarding section when dealing with meminfo
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 23:28:44 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110120142844.GA28358@barrios-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295516739-9839-1-git-send-email-pullip.cho@samsung.com>
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 06:45:39PM +0900, KyongHo Cho wrote:
> Sparsemem allows that a bank of memory spans over several adjacent
> sections if the start address and the end address of the bank
> belong to different sections.
> When gathering statictics of physical memory in mem_init() and
> show_mem(), this possiblity was not considered.
Please write down the result if we doesn't consider this patch.
I can understand what happens but for making good description and review,
merging easily, it would be better to write down the result without
the patch explicitly.
>
> This patch guarantees that simple increasing the pointer to page
> descriptors does not exceed the boundary of a section.
>
> Signed-off-by: KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/init.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/init.c b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> index 57c4c5c..6ccecbe 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> @@ -93,24 +93,38 @@ void show_mem(void)
>
> pfn1 = bank_pfn_start(bank);
> pfn2 = bank_pfn_end(bank);
> -
> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> end = pfn_to_page(pfn2 - 1) + 1;
> -
> +#else
> + pfn2--;
> do {
> - total++;
> - if (PageReserved(page))
> - reserved++;
> - else if (PageSwapCache(page))
> - cached++;
> - else if (PageSlab(page))
> - slab++;
> - else if (!page_count(page))
> - free++;
> - else
> - shared += page_count(page) - 1;
> - page++;
> - } while (page < end);
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> + if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn1) < pfn_to_section_nr(pfn2)) {
> + pfn1 += PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> + pfn1 &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
> + } else {
> + pfn1 = pfn2;
> + }
> + end = pfn_to_page(pfn1) + 1;
> +#endif
> + do {
> + total++;
> + if (PageReserved(page))
> + reserved++;
> + else if (PageSwapCache(page))
> + cached++;
> + else if (PageSlab(page))
> + slab++;
> + else if (!page_count(page))
> + free++;
> + else
> + shared += page_count(page) - 1;
> + page++;
> + } while (page < end);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> + } while (pfn1 < pfn2);
> +#endif
> }
>
> printk("%d pages of RAM\n", total);
> @@ -470,17 +484,31 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
>
> pfn1 = bank_pfn_start(bank);
> pfn2 = bank_pfn_end(bank);
> -
> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> end = pfn_to_page(pfn2 - 1) + 1;
> -
> +#else
> + pfn2--;
> do {
> - if (PageReserved(page))
> - reserved_pages++;
> - else if (!page_count(page))
> - free_pages++;
> - page++;
> - } while (page < end);
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> + if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn1) < pfn_to_section_nr(pfn2)) {
> + pfn1 += PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> + pfn1 &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
> + } else {
> + pfn1 = pfn2;
> + }
> + end = pfn_to_page(pfn1) + 1;
> +#endif
> + do {
> + if (PageReserved(page))
> + reserved_pages++;
> + else if (!page_count(page))
> + free_pages++;
> + page++;
> + } while (page < end);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> + } while (pfn1 < pfn2);
> +#endif
> }
Hmm.. new ifndef magic makes code readability bad.
Couldn't we do it by simple pfn iterator not page and pfn_valid check?
>
> /*
> --
> 1.6.2.5
>
> --
> 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/ .
> Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: minchan.kim@gmail.com (Minchan Kim)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: mm: Regarding section when dealing with meminfo
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 23:28:44 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110120142844.GA28358@barrios-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295516739-9839-1-git-send-email-pullip.cho@samsung.com>
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 06:45:39PM +0900, KyongHo Cho wrote:
> Sparsemem allows that a bank of memory spans over several adjacent
> sections if the start address and the end address of the bank
> belong to different sections.
> When gathering statictics of physical memory in mem_init() and
> show_mem(), this possiblity was not considered.
Please write down the result if we doesn't consider this patch.
I can understand what happens but for making good description and review,
merging easily, it would be better to write down the result without
the patch explicitly.
>
> This patch guarantees that simple increasing the pointer to page
> descriptors does not exceed the boundary of a section.
>
> Signed-off-by: KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/init.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/init.c b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> index 57c4c5c..6ccecbe 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> @@ -93,24 +93,38 @@ void show_mem(void)
>
> pfn1 = bank_pfn_start(bank);
> pfn2 = bank_pfn_end(bank);
> -
> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> end = pfn_to_page(pfn2 - 1) + 1;
> -
> +#else
> + pfn2--;
> do {
> - total++;
> - if (PageReserved(page))
> - reserved++;
> - else if (PageSwapCache(page))
> - cached++;
> - else if (PageSlab(page))
> - slab++;
> - else if (!page_count(page))
> - free++;
> - else
> - shared += page_count(page) - 1;
> - page++;
> - } while (page < end);
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> + if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn1) < pfn_to_section_nr(pfn2)) {
> + pfn1 += PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> + pfn1 &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
> + } else {
> + pfn1 = pfn2;
> + }
> + end = pfn_to_page(pfn1) + 1;
> +#endif
> + do {
> + total++;
> + if (PageReserved(page))
> + reserved++;
> + else if (PageSwapCache(page))
> + cached++;
> + else if (PageSlab(page))
> + slab++;
> + else if (!page_count(page))
> + free++;
> + else
> + shared += page_count(page) - 1;
> + page++;
> + } while (page < end);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> + } while (pfn1 < pfn2);
> +#endif
> }
>
> printk("%d pages of RAM\n", total);
> @@ -470,17 +484,31 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
>
> pfn1 = bank_pfn_start(bank);
> pfn2 = bank_pfn_end(bank);
> -
> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> end = pfn_to_page(pfn2 - 1) + 1;
> -
> +#else
> + pfn2--;
> do {
> - if (PageReserved(page))
> - reserved_pages++;
> - else if (!page_count(page))
> - free_pages++;
> - page++;
> - } while (page < end);
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> + if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn1) < pfn_to_section_nr(pfn2)) {
> + pfn1 += PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> + pfn1 &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
> + } else {
> + pfn1 = pfn2;
> + }
> + end = pfn_to_page(pfn1) + 1;
> +#endif
> + do {
> + if (PageReserved(page))
> + reserved_pages++;
> + else if (!page_count(page))
> + free_pages++;
> + page++;
> + } while (page < end);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> + } while (pfn1 < pfn2);
> +#endif
> }
Hmm.. new ifndef magic makes code readability bad.
Couldn't we do it by simple pfn iterator not page and pfn_valid check?
>
> /*
> --
> 1.6.2.5
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo at kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email at kvack.org </a>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>
To: KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
Ilho Lee <ilho215.lee@samsung.com>,
KeyYoung Park <keyyoung.park@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mm: Regarding section when dealing with meminfo
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 23:28:44 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110120142844.GA28358@barrios-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295516739-9839-1-git-send-email-pullip.cho@samsung.com>
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 06:45:39PM +0900, KyongHo Cho wrote:
> Sparsemem allows that a bank of memory spans over several adjacent
> sections if the start address and the end address of the bank
> belong to different sections.
> When gathering statictics of physical memory in mem_init() and
> show_mem(), this possiblity was not considered.
Please write down the result if we doesn't consider this patch.
I can understand what happens but for making good description and review,
merging easily, it would be better to write down the result without
the patch explicitly.
>
> This patch guarantees that simple increasing the pointer to page
> descriptors does not exceed the boundary of a section.
>
> Signed-off-by: KyongHo Cho <pullip.cho@samsung.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/init.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/init.c b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> index 57c4c5c..6ccecbe 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> @@ -93,24 +93,38 @@ void show_mem(void)
>
> pfn1 = bank_pfn_start(bank);
> pfn2 = bank_pfn_end(bank);
> -
> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> end = pfn_to_page(pfn2 - 1) + 1;
> -
> +#else
> + pfn2--;
> do {
> - total++;
> - if (PageReserved(page))
> - reserved++;
> - else if (PageSwapCache(page))
> - cached++;
> - else if (PageSlab(page))
> - slab++;
> - else if (!page_count(page))
> - free++;
> - else
> - shared += page_count(page) - 1;
> - page++;
> - } while (page < end);
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> + if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn1) < pfn_to_section_nr(pfn2)) {
> + pfn1 += PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> + pfn1 &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
> + } else {
> + pfn1 = pfn2;
> + }
> + end = pfn_to_page(pfn1) + 1;
> +#endif
> + do {
> + total++;
> + if (PageReserved(page))
> + reserved++;
> + else if (PageSwapCache(page))
> + cached++;
> + else if (PageSlab(page))
> + slab++;
> + else if (!page_count(page))
> + free++;
> + else
> + shared += page_count(page) - 1;
> + page++;
> + } while (page < end);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> + } while (pfn1 < pfn2);
> +#endif
> }
>
> printk("%d pages of RAM\n", total);
> @@ -470,17 +484,31 @@ void __init mem_init(void)
>
> pfn1 = bank_pfn_start(bank);
> pfn2 = bank_pfn_end(bank);
> -
> +#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> end = pfn_to_page(pfn2 - 1) + 1;
> -
> +#else
> + pfn2--;
> do {
> - if (PageReserved(page))
> - reserved_pages++;
> - else if (!page_count(page))
> - free_pages++;
> - page++;
> - } while (page < end);
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn1);
> + if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn1) < pfn_to_section_nr(pfn2)) {
> + pfn1 += PAGES_PER_SECTION;
> + pfn1 &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
> + } else {
> + pfn1 = pfn2;
> + }
> + end = pfn_to_page(pfn1) + 1;
> +#endif
> + do {
> + if (PageReserved(page))
> + reserved_pages++;
> + else if (!page_count(page))
> + free_pages++;
> + page++;
> + } while (page < end);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
> + } while (pfn1 < pfn2);
> +#endif
> }
Hmm.. new ifndef magic makes code readability bad.
Couldn't we do it by simple pfn iterator not page and pfn_valid check?
>
> /*
> --
> 1.6.2.5
>
> --
> 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/ .
> Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-20 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-20 9:45 [PATCH] ARM: mm: Regarding section when dealing with meminfo KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 9:45 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 9:45 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 14:28 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2011-01-20 14:28 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 14:28 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:25 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 17:25 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 17:25 ` Dave Hansen
[not found] ` <AANLkTinXAiShaf1f69ufVHg7KPaY5j=jmOTtK71GNNp5@mail.gmail.com>
2011-01-20 17:43 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:43 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:43 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:44 ` Minchan Kim
2011-01-20 17:52 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 17:52 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 17:52 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 17:20 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 17:20 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 17:20 ` Dave Hansen
[not found] ` <AANLkTi=nsAOtLPK75Wy5Rm8pfWob8xTP5259DyYuxR9J@mail.gmail.com>
2011-01-20 17:48 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 17:48 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 17:48 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-20 18:04 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 18:04 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 18:04 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 18:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 18:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 18:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 18:11 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 18:11 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-20 18:11 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-23 18:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-23 18:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-23 18:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-24 16:52 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-24 16:52 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-24 16:52 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-24 17:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-24 17:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-24 17:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-24 18:47 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-24 18:47 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-24 18:47 ` Dave Hansen
2011-01-25 0:33 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-25 0:33 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-25 0:33 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-21 2:12 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-21 2:12 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-21 2:12 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-21 10:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 10:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 10:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 11:15 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-21 11:15 ` KyongHo Cho
2011-01-21 11:15 ` KyongHo Cho
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=20110120142844.GA28358@barrios-desktop \
--to=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
--cc=ilho215.lee@samsung.com \
--cc=keyyoung.park@samsung.com \
--cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pullip.cho@samsung.com \
/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 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.