Re: [PATCH -mm 11/14] bootmem: respect goal more likely

[Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>]

Hi,

Yasunori Goto <y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com> writes:

> Hi.
>
>> > I'd like to straggle more, but may be need more time,
>> > because, IA64 doesn't have early_printk, and console is not enable
>> > at here.....
>> 
>> Hm, just to make sure: this is the patch that breaks booting, right?  If
>> you apply all patches in the series before this one, the machine boots
>> fine?
>
> Yes.

Okay.

>> 
>> Could you boot a working image with bootmem_debug in the command line?
>> Perhaps seeing the usual bootmem usage on this box gives a hint what is
>> broken.
>
> Ok. I'll try it.

Thanks!

>> > However, new_start and new_end should be named as new_start_offset and
>> > new_end_offset. They are not index, but offset from start address of
>> > the node.
>> 
>> Yes, that too.  I would also rename last_offset to last_eidx and
>> last_success to last_sidx.  What do you think?
>
> Last_sidx is ok. But, last_offset seems to be used to manage some
> allocated smaller chunks than one page. I'm not sure last_eidx is ok.

Sorry, my fault.

How about last_offset -> last_end_off to reflect that it is the offset
of the last allocations end?

And last_succes -> hint_idx to reflect that it is an index we start
searching from but it is not strict and we fall back if we find nothing
starting from there.  Also free_bootmem* sets it as a hint from where we
could start searching.

I also would set last_success/hint_idx to the _end_ of the successful
allocation (instead of the beginning of it) in alloc_bootmem_core
because we do not want to search for a new free block from the beginning
of the last allocation but rather right after it.

What do you think?

	Hannes