Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx> writes:
> Currently, to track a reserved and allocated region, we use two different
> ways for MAP_SHARED and MAP_PRIVATE. For MAP_SHARED, we use
> address_mapping's private_list and, for MAP_PRIVATE, we use a resv_map.
> Now, we are preparing to change a coarse grained lock which protect
> a region structure to fine grained lock, and this difference hinder it.
> So, before changing it, unify region structure handling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> index a3f868a..a1ae3ada 100644
> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> @@ -366,7 +366,12 @@ static void truncate_hugepages(struct inode *inode, loff_t lstart)
>
> static void hugetlbfs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
> {
> + struct resv_map *resv_map;
> +
> truncate_hugepages(inode, 0);
> + resv_map = (struct resv_map *)inode->i_mapping->private_data;
> + if (resv_map)
can resv_map == NULL ?
> + kref_put(&resv_map->refs, resv_map_release);
Also the kref_put is confusing. For shared mapping we don't have ref
count incremented right ? So may be you can directly call
resv_map_release or add a comment around explaining this more ?
> clear_inode(inode);
> }
>
> @@ -468,6 +473,11 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb,
> umode_t mode, dev_t dev)
> {
> struct inode *inode;
> + struct resv_map *resv_map;
> +
> + resv_map = resv_map_alloc();
> + if (!resv_map)
> + return NULL;
-aneesh
--
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>