On 07/09/2012 09:35 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On 07/03/2012 06:15 AM, Seth Jennings wrote:
>> Add information on the usage limits of zs_map_object()
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Seth Jennings <sjenning@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c | 7 ++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c b/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c
>> index 4942d41..abf7c13 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/zsmalloc/zsmalloc-main.c
>> @@ -747,7 +747,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(zs_free);
>> *
>> * Before using an object allocated from zs_malloc, it must be mapped using
>> * this function. When done with the object, it must be unmapped using
>> - * zs_unmap_object
>> + * zs_unmap_object.
>> + *
>> + * Only one object can be mapped per cpu at a time. There is no protection
>> + * against nested mappings.
>> + *
>> + * This function returns with preemption and page faults disabled.
>> */
>> void *zs_map_object(struct zs_pool *pool, unsigned long handle)
>> {
>>
>
> The comment is good but I hope we can detect it automatically with DEBUG
> option. It wouldn't be hard but it's a debug patch so not critical
> until we receive some report about the bug.
Yes, we could implement some detection scheme later.
>
> The possibility for nesting is that it is used by irq context.
>
> A uses the mapping
> .
> .
> .
> IRQ happen
> B uses the mapping in IRQ context
> .
> .
> .
>
> Maybe we need local_irq_save/restore in zs_[un]map_object path.
I'd rather not disable interrupts since that will create
unnecessary interrupt latency for all users, even if they
don't need interrupt protection. If a particular user uses
zs_map_object() in an interrupt path, it will be up to that
user to disable interrupts to ensure safety.
Thanks,
Seth
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
