From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e3.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3PMdWoO016985 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:39:32 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m3PMdW7X222258 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:39:32 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m3PMdLo7015518 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2008 18:39:22 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:39:09 -0700 From: Nishanth Aravamudan Subject: Re: [patch 07/18] hugetlbfs: per mount hstates Message-ID: <20080425223909.GF14623@us.ibm.com> References: <20080423015302.745723000@nick.local0.net> <20080423015430.378900000@nick.local0.net> <20080425180933.GF9680@us.ibm.com> <20080425203639.GE14623@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080425203639.GE14623@us.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: npiggin@suse.de Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, andi@firstfloor.org, kniht@linux.vnet.ibm.com, abh@cray.com, wli@holomorphy.com, agl@us.ibm.com List-ID: On 25.04.2008 [13:36:39 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > On 25.04.2008 [11:09:33 -0700], Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > On 23.04.2008 [11:53:09 +1000], npiggin@suse.de wrote: > > > Add support to have individual hstates for each hugetlbfs mount > > > > > > - Add a new pagesize= option to the hugetlbfs mount that allows setting > > > the page size > > > - Set up pointers to a suitable hstate for the set page size option > > > to the super block and the inode and the vma. > > > - Change the hstate accessors to use this information > > > - Add code to the hstate init function to set parsed_hstate for command > > > line processing > > > - Handle duplicated hstate registrations to the make command line user proof > > > > > > [np: take hstate out of hugetlbfs inode and vma->vm_private_data] > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen > > > Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin > > > --- > > > fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > > include/linux/hugetlb.h | 14 +++++++++----- > > > mm/hugetlb.c | 16 +++------------- > > > mm/memory.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++-- > > > 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > > > > > Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/hugetlb.h > > > =================================================================== > > > > > > > > > @@ -226,19 +228,21 @@ extern struct hstate hstates[HUGE_MAX_HS > > > > > > #define global_hstate (hstates[0]) > > > > > > -static inline struct hstate *hstate_vma(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > > > +static inline struct hstate *hstate_inode(struct inode *i) > > > { > > > - return &global_hstate; > > > + struct hugetlbfs_sb_info *hsb; > > > + hsb = HUGETLBFS_SB(i->i_sb); > > > + return hsb->hstate; > > > } > > > > > > static inline struct hstate *hstate_file(struct file *f) > > > { > > > - return &global_hstate; > > > + return hstate_inode(f->f_dentry->d_inode); > > > } > > > > > > -static inline struct hstate *hstate_inode(struct inode *i) > > > +static inline struct hstate *hstate_vma(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > > > { > > > - return &global_hstate; > > > + return hstate_file(vma->vm_file); > > > > Odd, diff seems to think you've moved these two functions around > > (hstate_{vma,inode})... > > Err, duh, which of course you have to because of the definitions :) > > However, doesn't this now make a core hugetlb functionality (which > really should only depend on CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE) depend on HUGETLBFS > being set to have access to HUGETLBFS_SB()? That seems to go in the > opposite direction from where we want to... Perhaps some of these > functions should be in the CONFIG_HUGETLBFS section of hugetlb.h? Even if you don't move anything as I had originally suggested, I think you need to express the CONFIG_ dependencies more clearly (that now HUGETLB_PAGE depends on HUGETLBFS, afaict). Urgh, there's actually other similar issue(s) in this file already... if CONFIG_HUGETLBFS, is_file_hugepages() is defined and calls is_file_shm_hugepages(), but that is defined in shm.h, which is only included if CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE... Adam, that seems buggy? Is this just further evidence that our current separation of the two options is bull-honky? Thanks, Nish -- Nishanth Aravamudan IBM Linux Technology Center -- 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: email@kvack.org