On 2017/01/04 23:20, Michal Hocko wrote:
> OK, so I've checked the open coded implementations and converted most of
> them. There are few which are either confused and need some special
> handling or need double checking.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/util.h b/drivers/md/bcache/util.h
> index cf2cbc211d83..9dc0f0ff0321 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/util.h
> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/util.h
> @@ -44,10 +44,7 @@ struct closure;
> (heap)->size = (_size); \
> _bytes = (heap)->size * sizeof(*(heap)->data); \
> (heap)->data = NULL; \
> - if (_bytes < KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE) \
> - (heap)->data = kmalloc(_bytes, (gfp)); \
> - if ((!(heap)->data) && ((gfp) & GFP_KERNEL)) \
> - (heap)->data = vmalloc(_bytes); \
> + (heap)->data = kvmalloc(_bytes, (gfp) & GFP_KERNEL); \
> (heap)->data; \
> })
>
> @@ -138,10 +135,7 @@ do { \
> (fifo)->front = (fifo)->back = 0; \
> (fifo)->data = NULL; \
> \
> - if (_bytes < KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE) \
> - (fifo)->data = kmalloc(_bytes, (gfp)); \
> - if ((!(fifo)->data) && ((gfp) & GFP_KERNEL)) \
> - (fifo)->data = vmalloc(_bytes); \
> + (fifo)->data = kvmalloc(_bytes, (gfp) & GFP_KERNEL); \
> (fifo)->data; \
> })
These macros are doing strange checks.
((gfp) & GFP_KERNEL) means any bit in GFP_KERNEL is set.
((gfp) & GFP_KERNEL) == GFP_KERNEL might make sense. Actually,
all callers seems to be passing GFP_KERNEL to these macros.
Kent, how do you want to correct this? You want to apply
a patch that removes gfp argument before applying this patch?
Or, you want Michal to directly overwrite by this patch?
Michal, "(fifo)->data = NULL;" line will become redundant
and "(gfp) & GFP_KERNEL" will become "GFP_KERNEL".
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>