From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937057AbYD1TLq (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:11:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933762AbYD1TLi (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:11:38 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.224]:54321 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932166AbYD1TLg (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Apr 2008 15:11:36 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UGIPaHV5MiBf1Xf2FBFo3aNDwY2pVoyj+jCohU0PrCZCYVWimWomU7DtklaC2rWPwv5Gh+5cF0mNTNmDKfP/uGsrCzOn8WChfw7peMu3KOjJMw1GA48+xQJjTecq47IJWjqE4MxfZx9UCa0y1/g1ZRggghRd14vUWs+Yif3rMFI= Message-ID: <86802c440804281211y3e512286k1d3f9f7e157b4957@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 12:11:29 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Johannes Weiner" Subject: Re: [patch] mm: node-setup agnostic free_bootmem() Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , "Linus Torvalds" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andrew Morton" , "Thomas Gleixner" , "H. Peter Anvin" , jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, "Siddha, Suresh B" In-Reply-To: <87od7t6hsx.fsf@saeurebad.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080426185516.GA32364@elte.hu> <20080426194143.GA8366@elte.hu> <87hcdmnccu.fsf@saeurebad.de> <20080427234630.GC14338@elte.hu> <877iein859.fsf@saeurebad.de> <20080428004046.GA16155@elte.hu> <86802c440804271848o5498eb9eu944f995cb9b8fc9a@mail.gmail.com> <87od7t6hsx.fsf@saeurebad.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Johannes Weiner wrote: > Hi Yinghai, > > > > "Yinghai Lu" writes: > > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >> > >> * Johannes Weiner wrote: > >> > >> > > so i very much agree that your changes are cleaner, i just wanted to > >> > > have one that has all the fixes included. > >> > > >> > I had planned this to be another patch because there are more then one > >> > boundary check I wanted to tighten. I can merge them though if you > >> > like. > >> > >> no, better to have them in separate patches. > >> > >> > > Would you like to post a patch against current -git or should i > >> > > extract the cleaner reserve_bootmem() from your previous patch? > >> > > >> > I just moved and have only sporadic internet access and free time > >> > slots available. Would be nice if you could do it! > >> > >> sure, find the merged patch below, against latest -git, boot-tested on > >> x86. Is this what you had in mind? > >> > >> Ingo > >> > >> ----------------> > >> Subject: mm: node-setup agnostic free_bootmem() > >> From: Johannes Weiner > >> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 13:36:31 +0200 > >> > >> Make free_bootmem() look up the node holding the specified address > >> range which lets it work transparently on single-node and multi-node > >> configurations. > >> > >> If the address range exceeds the node range, it well be marked free > >> across node boundaries, too. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner > >> CC: Andi Kleen > >> CC: Yinghai Lu > >> CC: Yasunori Goto > >> CC: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki > >> CC: Christoph Lameter > >> CC: Andrew Morton > >> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar > >> --- > >> mm/bootmem.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> Index: linux-x86.q/mm/bootmem.c > >> =================================================================== > >> --- linux-x86.q.orig/mm/bootmem.c > >> +++ linux-x86.q/mm/bootmem.c > >> @@ -493,8 +493,31 @@ int __init reserve_bootmem(unsigned long > >> void __init free_bootmem(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size) > >> { > >> bootmem_data_t *bdata; > >> - list_for_each_entry(bdata, &bdata_list, list) > >> - free_bootmem_core(bdata, addr, size); > >> + unsigned long pos = addr; > >> + unsigned long partsize = size; > >> + > >> + list_for_each_entry(bdata, &bdata_list, list) { > >> + unsigned long remainder = 0; > >> + > >> + if (pos < bdata->node_boot_start) > >> + continue; > >> + > >> + if (PFN_DOWN(pos + partsize) > bdata->node_low_pfn) { > >> + remainder = PFN_DOWN(pos + partsize) - bdata->node_low_pfn; > >> + partsize -= remainder; > >> + } > >> + > >> + free_bootmem_core(bdata, pos, partsize); > >> + > >> + if (!remainder) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + pos = PFN_PHYS(bdata->node_low_pfn + 1); > >> + } > >> + printk(KERN_ERR "free_bootmem: request: addr=%lx, size=%lx, " > >> + "state: pos=%lx, partsize=%lx\n", addr, size, > >> + pos, partsize); > >> + BUG(); > >> } > >> > >> unsigned long __init free_all_bootmem(void) > >> > > > > it will not work with cross nodes. > > > > for example: node 0: 0-2g, 4-6g, node1: 2-4g, 6-8g. > > and if ramdisk sit cross 2G boundary. you will only free the range > > before 2g. > > Yes, you stated that several times but this is not a technical argument: > These setups are afaik not yet supported by the kernel at all. And you > could not explain the node layout with the patch that implements support > for these configurations. I looked at Suresh's patch, and it still only has one bdata for one node. YH