Hi Matthew and thanks for your feedback and review comments!
On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 05:21:56PM -0800, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>
> I like the patch. I think it could be better.
>
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -5344,7 +5344,7 @@ void __meminit memmap_init_zone(unsigned long size, int nid, unsigned long zone,
> > goto not_early;
> >
> > if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) {
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK
> > /*
> > * Skip to the pfn preceding the next valid one (or
> > * end_pfn), such that we hit a valid pfn (or end_pfn)
>
> This ifdef makes me sad. Here's more of the context:
>
> if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) {
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP
> /*
> * Skip to the pfn preceding the next valid one (or
> * end_pfn), such that we hit a valid pfn (or end_pfn)
> * on our next iteration of the loop.
> */
> pfn = memblock_next_valid_pfn(pfn, end_pfn) - 1;
> #endif
> continue;
> }
>
> This is crying out for:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK
> unsigned long memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long max_pfn);
> #else
> static inline unsigned long memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn,
> unsigned long max_pfn)
> {
> return pfn + 1;
> }
> #endif
>
> in a header file somewhere.
>
Here is what I came up with, based on your proposal:
---------------------------------------------------------
diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
index 7ed0f7782d16..9efd592c5da4 100644
--- a/include/linux/memblock.h
+++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
@@ -187,7 +187,6 @@ int memblock_search_pfn_nid(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long *start_pfn,
unsigned long *end_pfn);
void __next_mem_pfn_range(int *idx, int nid, unsigned long *out_start_pfn,
unsigned long *out_end_pfn, int *out_nid);
-unsigned long memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long max_pfn);
/**
* for_each_mem_pfn_range - early memory pfn range iterator
diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
index ea818ff739cd..b82b30522585 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm.h
@@ -2064,8 +2064,14 @@ extern int __meminit __early_pfn_to_nid(unsigned long pfn,
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK
void zero_resv_unavail(void);
+unsigned long memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long max_pfn);
#else
static inline void zero_resv_unavail(void) {}
+static inline unsigned long memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn,
+ unsigned long max_pfn)
+{
+ return pfn + 1;
+}
#endif
extern void set_dma_reserve(unsigned long new_dma_reserve);
diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
index 46aacdfa4f4d..ad48cf200e3b 100644
--- a/mm/memblock.c
+++ b/mm/memblock.c
@@ -1100,6 +1100,7 @@ void __init_memblock __next_mem_pfn_range(int *idx, int nid,
if (out_nid)
*out_nid = r->nid;
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP */
unsigned long __init_memblock memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn,
unsigned long max_pfn)
@@ -1129,6 +1130,7 @@ unsigned long __init_memblock memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn,
return min(PHYS_PFN(type->regions[right].base), max_pfn);
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP
/**
* memblock_set_node - set node ID on memblock regions
* @base: base of area to set node ID for
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 76c9688b6a0a..4a3d5936a9a0 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -5344,14 +5344,12 @@ void __meminit memmap_init_zone(unsigned long size, int nid, unsigned long zone,
goto not_early;
if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) {
-#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP
/*
* Skip to the pfn preceding the next valid one (or
* end_pfn), such that we hit a valid pfn (or end_pfn)
* on our next iteration of the loop.
*/
pfn = memblock_next_valid_pfn(pfn, end_pfn) - 1;
-#endif
continue;
}
if (!early_pfn_in_nid(pfn, nid))
---------------------------------------------------------
Here are the sanity checks and tests done (all on v4.15-rc9):
- compiled natively on x86_64
- cross-compiled for ARCH=arm64 (NUMA=y/n), ARCH=tile (for which kbuild
test robot reported a build failure with [PATCH v1])
- no new issues reported by:
- checkpatch --strict
- make W=1
- make CHECK="/path/to/smatch -p=kernel --two-passes --spammy" C=2 mm/
- make C=2 CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__" -Wunused-function mm/
- cppcheck --force --enable=all --inconclusive mm/
- re-tested on H3ULCB and confirmed the same behavior as with [PATCH v2]
If no other comments, I will submit [PATCH v3] in the next days.
Many thanks!
Best regards,
Eugeniu,
--
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>
