From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
To: Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@gmail.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 04/10] mm: frontswap: split out __frontswap_unuse_pages
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 07:27:56 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e82083d1-af9f-4766-992c-926413f02423@default> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1339410650.4999.38.camel@lappy>
> From: Sasha Levin [mailto:levinsasha928@gmail.com]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] mm: frontswap: split out __frontswap_unuse_pages
>
> > > + assert_spin_locked(&swap_lock);
> >
> > Normally, we should use this assertion when we can't find swap_lock is hold or not easily
> > by complicated call depth or unexpected use-case like general function.
> > But I expect this function's caller is very limited, not complicated.
> > Just comment write down isn't enough?
>
> Is there a reason not to do it though? Debugging a case where this
> function is called without a swaplock and causes corruption won't be
> easy.
I'm not sure of the correct kernel style but I like the fact
that assert_spin_locked both documents the lock requirement and tests
it at runtime.
I don't know the correct kernel syntax but is it possible
to make this code be functional when the kernel "debug"
option is on, but a no-op when "debug" is disabled?
IMHO, that would be the ideal solution.
> > > + for (type = swap_list.head; type >= 0; type = si->next) {
> > > + si = swap_info[type];
> > > + si_frontswap_pages = atomic_read(&si->frontswap_pages);
> > > + if (total_pages_to_unuse < si_frontswap_pages) {
> > > + pages = pages_to_unuse = total_pages_to_unuse;
> > > + } else {
> > > + pages = si_frontswap_pages;
> > > + pages_to_unuse = 0; /* unuse all */
> > > + }
> > > + /* ensure there is enough RAM to fetch pages from frontswap */
> > > + if (security_vm_enough_memory_mm(current->mm, pages)) {
> > > + ret = -ENOMEM;
> >
> >
> > Nipick:
> > I am not sure detailed error returning would be good.
> > Caller doesn't matter it now but it can consider it in future.
> > Hmm,
>
> Is there a reason to avoid returning a meaningful error when it's pretty
> easy?
I'm certainly not an expert on kernel style (as this whole series
of patches demonstrates :-) but I think setting a meaningful
error code is useful documentation and plans for future users
that might use the error code.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-11 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-10 10:50 [PATCH v3 00/10] minor frontswap cleanups and tracing support Sasha Levin
2012-06-10 10:50 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] mm: frontswap: remove casting from function calls through ops structure Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:20 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] mm: frontswap: trivial coding convention issues Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:24 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] mm: frontswap: split out __frontswap_curr_pages Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:28 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] mm: frontswap: split out __frontswap_unuse_pages Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:43 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-11 10:30 ` Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 14:27 ` Dan Magenheimer [this message]
2012-06-11 14:31 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-06-11 14:38 ` Sasha Levin
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] mm: frontswap: split frontswap_shrink further to simplify locking Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:49 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] mm: frontswap: make all branches of if statement in put page consistent Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:52 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] mm: frontswap: remove unnecessary check during initialization Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 5:54 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] mm: frontswap: add tracing support Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 6:12 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-11 8:33 ` Pekka Enberg
2012-06-11 10:39 ` Sasha Levin
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] mm: frontswap: split out function to clear a page out Sasha Levin
2012-06-11 6:16 ` Minchan Kim
2012-06-10 10:51 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] mm: frontswap: remove unneeded headers Sasha Levin
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=e82083d1-af9f-4766-992c-926413f02423@default \
--to=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=levinsasha928@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=minchan@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 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).