Re: [PATCH] mm: make free_bootmem to loop bdata_list

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:39:34 -0700
"Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:39 PM, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
> <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:53:31 -0700
> >  "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >  > ===================================================================
> >  > --- linux-2.6.orig/mm/bootmem.c
> >  > +++ linux-2.6/mm/bootmem.c
> >  > @@ -427,7 +438,9 @@ int __init reserve_bootmem(unsigned long
> >  >
> >  >  void __init free_bootmem(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size)
> >  >  {
> >  > -     free_bootmem_core(NODE_DATA(0)->bdata, addr, size);
> >  > +     bootmem_data_t *bdata;
> >  > +     list_for_each_entry(bdata, &bdata_list, list)
> >  > +             free_bootmem_core(bdata, addr, size);
> >  >  }
> >
> >
> >  Just a confirmation.
> >  In above loop, boundary check in free_bootmem_core() hits two or more times ?
> >  If yes, it's ok.
> >  If no, please exit loop at hit.
> 
> yes. need that handle range cross node (RAMDISK case that is end
> beyond end_of_ram).
> 
Then, <addr, size> can spread across nodes. 

IMHO, there are *big* memory hole between nodes in some systems. 
This kind of interface, which allows alloc/free bootmem accross nodes,
will see terrible trouble when a programmer assumes  "alloc/free bootmem
always return contiguous size of memory" (This is guaranteed now,)

Does the new allocator (you changed ?) guarantee that returned <address, size>
is fully contiguous even if it spreads accross nodes ?

If no, NACK for this version.

Thanks,
-Kame


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/