From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Vegard Nossum <vegardno@ifi.uio.no>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] mm: add a new command-line kmemcheck value
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:47:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5303D4EF.7040906@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53017544.90908@huawei.com>
On 02/16/2014 06:34 PM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init.c b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> index f971306..cd7d75f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> @@ -135,6 +135,15 @@ static void __init probe_page_size_mask(void)
> page_size_mask |= 1 << PG_LEVEL_2M;
> #endif
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_KMEMCHECK)
> + if (!kmemcheck_on) {
> + if (direct_gbpages)
> + page_size_mask |= 1 << PG_LEVEL_1G;
> + if (cpu_has_pse)
> + page_size_mask |= 1 << PG_LEVEL_2M;
> + }
> +#endif
This is a copy-n-paste from just above which is inside a:
#if !defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC) && !defined(CONFIG_KMEMCHECK)
This gets really confusing to figure out which one of these options will
rule. Maybe it's just time to add a kmemcheck_active() function which
gets #ifdef'd to 0 if the config option is off.
> /* Enable PSE if available */
> if (cpu_has_pse)
> set_in_cr4(X86_CR4_PSE);
> @@ -331,6 +340,8 @@ bool pfn_range_is_mapped(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
> return false;
> }
>
> +extern int kmemcheck_on;
Didn't you _just_ reference this? Either it's unnecessary, or this code
doesn't compile.
> /*
> * Setup the direct mapping of the physical memory at PAGE_OFFSET.
> * This runs before bootmem is initialized and gets pages directly from
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
> index d87dd6d..d686ee0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
> @@ -44,30 +44,35 @@
> #ifdef CONFIG_KMEMCHECK_ONESHOT_BY_DEFAULT
> # define KMEMCHECK_ENABLED 2
> #endif
> +#define KMEMCHECK_CLOSED 3
>
> -int kmemcheck_enabled = KMEMCHECK_ENABLED;
> +int kmemcheck_enabled = KMEMCHECK_CLOSED;
> +int kmemcheck_on = 0;
This is pretty confusing. If I see "kmemcheck_on" and
"kmemcheck_enabled" in the code, it's hard to figure out which one to
trust and infer what they were _supposed_ to be doing.
Please add some documentation for these, at least. The commit message
isn't enough.
I'd also suggest breaking this up in to at least two pieces: one which
adds the functions to check at runtime if we want to use kmemcheck, and
then a second one to actually add this tunable.
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Vegard Nossum <vegardno@ifi.uio.no>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] mm: add a new command-line kmemcheck value
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 13:47:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5303D4EF.7040906@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53017544.90908@huawei.com>
On 02/16/2014 06:34 PM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init.c b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> index f971306..cd7d75f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
> @@ -135,6 +135,15 @@ static void __init probe_page_size_mask(void)
> page_size_mask |= 1 << PG_LEVEL_2M;
> #endif
>
> +#if defined(CONFIG_KMEMCHECK)
> + if (!kmemcheck_on) {
> + if (direct_gbpages)
> + page_size_mask |= 1 << PG_LEVEL_1G;
> + if (cpu_has_pse)
> + page_size_mask |= 1 << PG_LEVEL_2M;
> + }
> +#endif
This is a copy-n-paste from just above which is inside a:
#if !defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC) && !defined(CONFIG_KMEMCHECK)
This gets really confusing to figure out which one of these options will
rule. Maybe it's just time to add a kmemcheck_active() function which
gets #ifdef'd to 0 if the config option is off.
> /* Enable PSE if available */
> if (cpu_has_pse)
> set_in_cr4(X86_CR4_PSE);
> @@ -331,6 +340,8 @@ bool pfn_range_is_mapped(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
> return false;
> }
>
> +extern int kmemcheck_on;
Didn't you _just_ reference this? Either it's unnecessary, or this code
doesn't compile.
> /*
> * Setup the direct mapping of the physical memory at PAGE_OFFSET.
> * This runs before bootmem is initialized and gets pages directly from
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
> index d87dd6d..d686ee0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/kmemcheck/kmemcheck.c
> @@ -44,30 +44,35 @@
> #ifdef CONFIG_KMEMCHECK_ONESHOT_BY_DEFAULT
> # define KMEMCHECK_ENABLED 2
> #endif
> +#define KMEMCHECK_CLOSED 3
>
> -int kmemcheck_enabled = KMEMCHECK_ENABLED;
> +int kmemcheck_enabled = KMEMCHECK_CLOSED;
> +int kmemcheck_on = 0;
This is pretty confusing. If I see "kmemcheck_on" and
"kmemcheck_enabled" in the code, it's hard to figure out which one to
trust and infer what they were _supposed_ to be doing.
Please add some documentation for these, at least. The commit message
isn't enough.
I'd also suggest breaking this up in to at least two pieces: one which
adds the functions to check at runtime if we want to use kmemcheck, and
then a second one to actually add this tunable.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-18 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-17 2:34 [PATCH V2] mm: add a new command-line kmemcheck value Xishi Qiu
2014-02-17 2:34 ` Xishi Qiu
2014-02-18 10:28 ` Vegard Nossum
2014-02-18 10:28 ` Vegard Nossum
2014-02-18 12:38 ` Xishi Qiu
2014-02-18 12:38 ` Xishi Qiu
2014-02-18 21:47 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2014-02-18 21:47 ` Dave Hansen
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=5303D4EF.7040906@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
--cc=vegardno@ifi.uio.no \
--cc=x86@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 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.