On Fri 24-07-15 10:27:02, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> On 07/23/2015 03:18 PM, kbuild test robot wrote:
> >tree: git://git.cmpxchg.org/linux-mmotm.git master
> >head: 61f5f835b6f06fbc233481b5d3c0afd71ecf54e8
> >commit: 0c5e1e8ed55974975bb829e4b93cf19aa0dfcafc [229/385] hugetlbfs: add hugetlbfs_fallocate()
> >config: i386-randconfig-r0-201529 (attached as .config)
> >reproduce:
> > git checkout 0c5e1e8ed55974975bb829e4b93cf19aa0dfcafc
> > # save the attached .config to linux build tree
> > make ARCH=i386
> >
> >All error/warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >
> > fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c: In function 'hugetlbfs_fallocate':
> >>>fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c:578:13: error: 'struct vm_area_struct' has no member named 'vm_policy'
> > pseudo_vma.vm_policy =
> > ^
> >>>fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c:579:4: error: implicit declaration of function 'mpol_shared_policy_lookup' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> > mpol_shared_policy_lookup(&HUGETLBFS_I(inode)->policy,
> > ^
> > fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c:595:28: error: 'struct vm_area_struct' has no member named 'vm_policy'
> > mpol_cond_put(pseudo_vma.vm_policy);
> > ^
> > fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c:601:27: error: 'struct vm_area_struct' has no member named 'vm_policy'
> > mpol_cond_put(pseudo_vma.vm_policy);
> > ^
> > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
> >
> >vim +578 fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> >
> > 572 if (signal_pending(current)) {
> > 573 error = -EINTR;
> > 574 break;
> > 575 }
> > 576
> > 577 /* Get policy based on index */
> > > 578 pseudo_vma.vm_policy =
> > > 579 mpol_shared_policy_lookup(&HUGETLBFS_I(inode)->policy,
> > 580 index);
> > 581
> > 582 /* addr is the offset within the file (zero based) */
> >
> >---
> >0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
> >https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
> >
>
> Michal already added a patch to mmotm. The patch below is functionally
> equivalent but moves the #ifdef out of the executable code path, and
> modifies a comment. This has been functional/stress tested in a kernel
> without CONFIG_NUMA defined.
I will drop my quick hack once Andrew picks your patch which is indeed
better.
One nit below...
> hugetlbfs: build fix fallocate if not CONFIG_NUMA
>
> When fallocate preallocation allocates pages, it will use the
> defined numa policy. However, if numa is not defined there is
> no such policy and no code should reference numa policy. Create
> wrappers to isolate policy manipulation code that are NOOP in
> the non-NUMA case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> index d977cae..4bae359 100644
> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> @@ -85,6 +85,29 @@ static const match_table_t tokens = {
> {Opt_err, NULL},
> };
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> +static inline void hugetlb_set_vma_policy(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> + struct inode *inode, pgoff_t index)
> +{
> + vma->vm_policy = mpol_shared_policy_lookup(&HUGETLBFS_I(inode)->policy,
> + index);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void hugetlb_vma_mpol_cond_put(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
The naming could be better. What about hugetlb_drop_vma_policy to be
symmetric to hugetlb_set_vma_policy. Or is there any reason to expose
that this is a cond_put?
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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>