From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org, toshi.kani@hp.com, linuxram@us.ibm.com,
rientjes@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [Resend][Bug fix PATCH v5] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 10:57:38 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5179DF12.80908@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130424133719.94c7d301df844c4bcc987a53@linux-foundation.org>
2013/04/25 5:37, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:50:21 +0900 Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:
>>
>> [ 296.867031] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>> [ 296.922273] kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:3409!
>>
>> ...
>>
>> The reason why the messages are shown is to release a resource structure,
>> allocated by bootmem, by kfree(). So when we release a resource structure,
>> we should check whether it is allocated by bootmem or not.
>>
>> But even if we know a resource structure is allocated by bootmem, we cannot
>> release it since SLxB cannot treat it. So for reusing a resource structure,
>> this patch remembers it by using bootmem_resource as follows:
>>
>> When releasing a resource structure by free_resource(), free_resource() checks
>> whether the resource structure is allocated by bootmem or not. If it is
>> allocated by bootmem, free_resource() adds it to bootmem_resource. If it is
>> not allocated by bootmem, free_resource() release it by kfree().
>>
>> And when getting a new resource structure by get_resource(), get_resource()
>> checks whether bootmem_resource has released resource structures or not. If
>> there is a released resource structure, get_resource() returns it. If there is
>> not a releaed resource structure, get_resource() returns new resource structure
>> allocated by kzalloc().
>>
>> ...
>>
>
> Looks good to me.
>
>> --- a/kernel/resource.c
>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>> #include <linux/device.h>
>> #include <linux/pfn.h>
>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>> #include <asm/io.h>
>>
>>
>> @@ -50,6 +51,14 @@ struct resource_constraint {
>>
>> static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);
>>
>> +/*
>> + * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
>> + * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
>> + * we need to remember the resource.
>> + */
>> +static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
>> +
>> static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>> {
>> struct resource *p = v;
>> @@ -151,6 +160,40 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */
>>
>> +static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
>> +{
>> + if (!res)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (!PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {
>
> Did you consider using a bit in resource.flags? There appear to be
> four free ones left. The VM trickery will work OK I guess, but isn't
> very "nice".
>
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + res->sibling = bootmem_resource_free;
>> + bootmem_resource_free = res;
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + } else {
>> + kfree(res);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
>> +{
>> + struct resource *res = NULL;
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> + if (bootmem_resource_free) {
>> + res = bootmem_resource_free;
>> + bootmem_resource_free = res->sibling;
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
>> +
>> + if (res)
>> + memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>> + else
>> + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
>> +
>> + return res;
>> +}
>
> I think I'll rename this to alloc_resource(). In Linux "get" often
> (but not always) means "take a reference on". So "get" pairs with
> "put" and "alloc" pairs with "free".
I forgot to answer it.
I think so too. And I have no objection about your update patch.
Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
> --
> 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>
>
--
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>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-26 1:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-23 1:37 [Bug fix PATCH v5] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-23 21:05 ` Toshi Kani
2013-04-23 23:47 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-23 23:50 ` [Resend][Bug " Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-24 20:37 ` Andrew Morton
2013-04-25 0:56 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu
2013-04-26 1:57 ` Yasuaki Ishimatsu [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=5179DF12.80908@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=toshi.kani@hp.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).