Re: [Resend][Bug fix PATCH v5] Reusing a resource structure allocated by bootmem

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



2013/04/25 5:37, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:50:21 +0900 Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

When hot removing memory presented at boot time, following messages are shown:

[  296.867031] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[  296.922273] kernel BUG at mm/slub.c:3409!

...

The reason why the messages are shown is to release a resource structure,
allocated by bootmem, by kfree(). So when we release a resource structure,
we should check whether it is allocated by bootmem or not.

But even if we know a resource structure is allocated by bootmem, we cannot
release it since SLxB cannot treat it. So for reusing a resource structure,
this patch remembers it by using bootmem_resource as follows:

When releasing a resource structure by free_resource(), free_resource() checks
whether the resource structure is allocated by bootmem or not. If it is
allocated by bootmem, free_resource() adds it to bootmem_resource. If it is
not allocated by bootmem, free_resource() release it by kfree().

And when getting a new resource structure by get_resource(), get_resource()
checks whether bootmem_resource has released resource structures or not. If
there is a released resource structure, get_resource() returns it. If there is
not a releaed resource structure, get_resource() returns new resource structure
allocated by kzalloc().

...


Looks good to me.

--- a/kernel/resource.c
+++ b/kernel/resource.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
  #include <linux/seq_file.h>
  #include <linux/device.h>
  #include <linux/pfn.h>
+#include <linux/mm.h>
  #include <asm/io.h>


@@ -50,6 +51,14 @@ struct resource_constraint {

  static DEFINE_RWLOCK(resource_lock);

+/*
+ * For memory hotplug, there is no way to free resource entries allocated
+ * by boot mem after the system is up. So for reusing the resource entry
+ * we need to remember the resource.
+ */
+static struct resource *bootmem_resource_free;
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(bootmem_resource_lock);
+
  static void *r_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
  {
  	struct resource *p = v;
@@ -151,6 +160,40 @@ __initcall(ioresources_init);

  #endif /* CONFIG_PROC_FS */

+static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
+{
+	if (!res)
+		return;
+
+	if (!PageSlab(virt_to_head_page(res))) {


Did you consider using a bit in resource.flags?

I considered to add a new flag such as IORESOURCE_BOOTMEM first.
But even if we don't add the new flag, we can check whether
struct resource is managed by SLxB or not. So I selected this way.

Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu

There appear to be
four free ones left.  The VM trickery will work OK I guess, but isn't
very "nice".

+		spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+		res->sibling = bootmem_resource_free;
+		bootmem_resource_free = res;
+		spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+	} else {
+		kfree(res);
+	}
+}
+
+static struct resource *get_resource(gfp_t flags)
+{
+	struct resource *res = NULL;
+
+	spin_lock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+	if (bootmem_resource_free) {
+		res = bootmem_resource_free;
+		bootmem_resource_free = res->sibling;
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&bootmem_resource_lock);
+
+	if (res)
+		memset(res, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
+	else
+		res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource), flags);
+
+	return res;
+}


I think I'll rename this to alloc_resource().  In Linux "get" often
(but not always) means "take a reference on".  So "get" pairs with
"put" and "alloc" pairs with "free".




--
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>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]