linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kees Bakker <kees@ijzerbout.nl>,
	Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>,
	Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
	Byungchul Park <byungchul@sk.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@sk.com>,
	Ying Huang <ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/mempolicy: Skip extra call to __alloc_pages_bulk in weighted interleave
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:01:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250630230147.2280374-1-joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250630153501.64160f386faa541c93344e48@linux-foundation.org>

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 15:35:01 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 13:21:14 -0700 Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > This is a goto into the middle of a for-loop.
> > > What do you think is going to happen at the end of that loop?
> > > 
> > > I think (only tested with a small C program) it will go to the start of
> > > the loop, do the i++, check i<nnodes, and possibly do the loop again.
> > > Variable i is uninitialized at that point. In the loop it hits several
> > > uninitialized variables.
> > 
> > >From what I can see from my code, I think the only the goto statement leads
> > to a second iteration of the for loop is if allocation fails.
> > But otherwise, it should be ok since we always hit
> > 
> > if (total_allocated == nr_pages)
> > 	break;
> > 
> > within the loop. For the branch that takes the goto, we set
> > node_pages = rem_pages, then jump to the label and allocate.
> > So nr_allocated = node_pages, and total_allocated = 0 + nr_allocated
> > so total_allocated = node_pages
> > 
> > total_allocated == node_pages == rem_pages == nr_pages, so we will break. Phew!
> > 
> > To cover the case where allocation fails, I think we should be breaking
> > anyways, so I can definitely add a new check for this.
> 
> I do agree, that goto is a "goto too far".  That we can do a thing
> doesn't mean we should do it!

Haha : -)

> > > Even if this is legal C code, it is pretty obscure.
> > 
> > I agree that it not very clean. I did this to reduce the amount of repeated
> > code there is. Even if this code works, it could definitely be written
> > better to make it more readable and maintainable. As I noted in my second
> > response to Gregory, I'm not planning on pursuing this version anymore,
> > so if I decide to send a second version, I'll keep this in mind.
> 
> Cool, I'll drop this version from mm-unstable.

Sounds good Andrew, thank you always for all of your help!
Joshua

Sent using hkml (https://github.com/sjp38/hackermail)


      reply	other threads:[~2025-06-30 23:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-26 20:09 [PATCH 0/2] mm/mempolicy: Cleanup and optimization for weighted interleave Joshua Hahn
2025-06-26 20:09 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm/mempolicy: Simplify weighted interleave bulk alloc calculations Joshua Hahn
2025-06-26 21:51   ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-27  4:31   ` Gregory Price
2025-06-27  7:38   ` Rakie Kim
2025-06-27  7:45   ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-26 20:09 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm/mempolicy: Skip extra call to __alloc_pages_bulk in weighted interleave Joshua Hahn
2025-06-27  4:28   ` Gregory Price
2025-06-27 16:13     ` Joshua Hahn
2025-06-30 15:39       ` Joshua Hahn
2025-06-30 20:05   ` Kees Bakker
2025-06-30 20:21     ` Joshua Hahn
2025-06-30 22:35       ` Andrew Morton
2025-06-30 23:01         ` Joshua Hahn [this message]

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=20250630230147.2280374-1-joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
    --to=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
    --cc=byungchul@sk.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=gourry@gourry.net \
    --cc=kees@ijzerbout.nl \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
    --cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=ziy@nvidia.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 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).