Re: [PATCH v2 08/23] mm/memblock: Add memblock memory allocationapis

From: Grygorii Strashko
Date: Fri Dec 06 2013 - 08:55:32 EST


On 12/05/2013 10:34 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
Grygorii,

On Thursday 05 December 2013 01:48 PM, Strashko, Grygorii wrote:
Hi Tejun,

On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 06:35:00PM +0200, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
+#define memblock_virt_alloc_align(x, align) \
+ memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid(x, align, BOOTMEM_LOW_LIMIT, \
+ BOOTMEM_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE, MAX_NUMNODES)

Also, do we really need this align variant separate when the caller
can simply specify 0 for the default?

Unfortunately Yes.
We need it to keep compatibility with bootmem/nobootmem
which don't handle 0 as default align value.

Hmm... why wouldn't just interpreting 0 to SMP_CACHE_BYTES in the
memblock_virt*() function work?


Problem is not with memblock_virt*(). The issue will happen in case if
memblock or nobootmem are disabled in below code (memblock_virt*() is disabled).

+/* Fall back to all the existing bootmem APIs */
+#define memblock_virt_alloc(x) \
+ __alloc_bootmem(x, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, BOOTMEM_LOW_LIMIT)

which will be transformed to
+/* Fall back to all the existing bootmem APIs */
+#define memblock_virt_alloc(x, align) \
+ __alloc_bootmem(x, align, BOOTMEM_LOW_LIMIT)

and used as

memblock_virt_alloc(size, 0);

so, by default bootmem code will use 0 as default alignment and not SMP_CACHE_BYTES
and that is wrong.

Looks like you didn't understood the suggestion completely.
The fall back inline will look like below .....

static inline memblock_virt_alloc(x, align)
{
if (align == 0)
align = SMP_CACHE_BYTES
__alloc_bootmem(x, align, BOOTMEM_LOW_LIMIT);
}


I understand. thanks.

Regards,
-grygorii
--
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/