Re: [PATCH v4 23/28] dax/bus: Factor out dev dax resize logic

[Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>]

On Mon, 07 Oct 2024 18:16:29 -0500
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com> wrote:

> Dynamic Capacity regions must limit dev dax resources to those areas
> which have extents backing real memory.  Such DAX regions are dubbed
> 'sparse' regions.  In order to manage where memory is available four
> alternatives were considered:
> 
> 1) Create a single region resource child on region creation which
>    reserves the entire region.  Then as extents are added punch holes in
>    this reservation.  This requires new resource manipulation to punch
>    the holes and still requires an additional iteration over the extent
>    areas which may already have existing dev dax resources used.
> 
> 2) Maintain an ordered xarray of extents which can be queried while
>    processing the resize logic.  The issue is that existing region->res
>    children may artificially limit the allocation size sent to
>    alloc_dev_dax_range().  IE the resource children can't be directly
>    used in the resize logic to find where space in the region is.  This
>    also poses a problem of managing the available size in 2 places.
> 
> 3) Maintain a separate resource tree with extents.  This option is the
>    same as 2) but with the different data structure.  Most ideally there
>    should be a unified representation of the resource tree not two places
>    to look for space.
> 
> 4) Create region resource children for each extent.  Manage the dax dev
>    resize logic in the same way as before but use a region child
>    (extent) resource as the parents to find space within each extent.
> 
> Option 4 can leverage the existing resize algorithm to find space within
> the extents.  It manages the available space in a singular resource tree
> which is less complicated for finding space.
> 
> In preparation for this change, factor out the dev_dax_resize logic.
> For static regions use dax_region->res as the parent to find space for
> the dax ranges.  Future patches will use the same algorithm with
> individual extent resources as the parent.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> ---
> Changes:
> [Jonathan: Fix handling of alloc]

Trivial comments inline.
Not an area I know much about, so treat this one as a 'smells ok'
type of tag.
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>



> +
> +static ssize_t dev_dax_resize(struct dax_region *dax_region,
> +		struct dev_dax *dev_dax, resource_size_t size)
> +{
> +	resource_size_t avail = dax_region_avail_size(dax_region), to_alloc;
	resource_size_t to_alloc;

on it's own line.  That was hard to spot all the way over there.
Obviously this was in original code, but maybe slip a tidy up in whilst
you are moving it?

> +	resource_size_t dev_size = dev_dax_size(dev_dax);
> +	struct device *dev = &dev_dax->dev;
> +	resource_size_t alloc;
> +
> +	if (dev->driver)
> +		return -EBUSY;
> +	if (size == dev_size)
> +		return 0;
> +	if (size > dev_size && size - dev_size > avail)
> +		return -ENOSPC;
> +	if (size < dev_size)
> +		return dev_dax_shrink(dev_dax, size);
> +
> +	to_alloc = size - dev_size;
> +	if (dev_WARN_ONCE(dev, !alloc_is_aligned(dev_dax, to_alloc),
> +			"resize of %pa misaligned\n", &to_alloc))
> +		return -ENXIO;
> +
> +retry:
> +	alloc = dev_dax_resize_static(&dax_region->res, dev_dax, to_alloc);
> +	if (alloc <= 0)
> +		return alloc;
>  	to_alloc -= alloc;
>  	if (to_alloc)
>  		goto retry;