From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laurent Pinchart Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:54:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mm: cma: Don't crash on allocation if CMA area can't be activated Message-Id: <1796959.xTvOMRAxHJ@avalon> List-Id: References: <1414074828-4488-1-git-send-email-laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com> <20141024025014.GA15243@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> In-Reply-To: <20141024025014.GA15243@js1304-P5Q-DELUXE> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hello, On Friday 24 October 2014 11:50:14 Joonsoo Kim wrote: > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:02:49AM +0800, Weijie Yang wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Thursday 23 October 2014 18:53:36 Michal Nazarewicz wrote: > > >> On Thu, Oct 23 2014, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > >> > If activation of the CMA area fails its mutex won't be initialized, > > >> > leading to an oops at allocation time when trying to lock the mutex. > > >> > Fix this by failing allocation if the area hasn't been successfully > > >> > actived, and detect that condition by moving the CMA bitmap > > >> > allocation after page block reservation completion. > > >> > > > >> > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart > > >> > > > >> > > >> Cc: # v3.17 > > >> Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz > > > > This patch is good, but how about add a active field in cma struct? > > use cma->active to check whether cma is actived successfully. > > I think it will make code more clear and readable. > > Just my little opinion. > > Or just setting cma->count to 0 would work fine. I would prefer setting cma->count to 0 to avoid the extra field. I'll modify the patch accordingly. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart