From: Yury Norov <ynorov@nvidia.com>
To: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
Cc: "Eliot Courtney" <ecourtney@nvidia.com>,
"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"Burak Emir" <burak.emir@gmail.com>,
"Yury Norov" <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
"Miguel Ojeda" <ojeda@kernel.org>,
"Boqun Feng" <boqun@kernel.org>, "Gary Guo" <gary@garyguo.net>,
"Björn Roy Baron" <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
"Benno Lossin" <lossin@kernel.org>,
"Andreas Hindborg" <a.hindborg@kernel.org>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@umich.edu>,
"Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>,
"Daniel Almeida" <daniel.almeida@collabora.com>,
"Tamir Duberstein" <tamird@kernel.org>,
"Onur Özkan" <work@onurozkan.dev>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
"Alistair Popple" <apopple@nvidia.com>,
"Timur Tabi" <ttabi@nvidia.com>, "Zhi Wang" <zhiw@nvidia.com>,
rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
nova-gpu@lists.linux.dev, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 4/5] rust: id_pool: do not round capacity up to BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 15:47:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <avTUWznKqpgUI5M-@yury> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DMRW81BTJRI1.6KL933YC1FM8@nvidia.com>
On Wed, Nov 11, 2026 at 07:44:19AM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Wed Nov 11, 2026 at 2:42 AM JST, Yury Norov wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 09, 2026 at 05:32:52PM +0900, Eliot Courtney wrote:
> >> Current code in IdPool::with_capacity rounds the capacity up to
> >> BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN, but BitmapVec::new works fine with values
> >> smaller than this and still uses an inline representation. Remove this
> >> behaviour.
> >>
> >> This allows specifying a real capacity of 0, which was not previously
> >> possible.
> >
> > How real capacity 0 became possible? Did we eventually find a use case
> > for it? If not, it should not be possible, and the implementation
> > should not explicitly handle that case.
> >
> >> This breaks `grow_request` in this case, so change it to grow
> >> to at least `BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN`, mirroring the capacity floor in
> >> `shrink_request`.
> >
> > Not the grow_request only, I believe. I recall the discussion about
> > panic on most operations on a 0-bit pool.
>
> You have panics on most operations of a pool of any size if accessed out
> of bounds. Zero size is not special.
>
> >
> >> Reviewed-by: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Burak Emir <burak.emir@gmail.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eliot Courtney <ecourtney@nvidia.com>
> >> ---
> >> rust/kernel/id_pool.rs | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> >> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/rust/kernel/id_pool.rs b/rust/kernel/id_pool.rs
> >> index 92eeb7caa243..f77bd90325ff 100644
> >> --- a/rust/kernel/id_pool.rs
> >> +++ b/rust/kernel/id_pool.rs
> >> @@ -112,13 +112,8 @@ pub fn new() -> Self {
> >> }
> >>
> >> /// Constructs a new [`IdPool`] with space for a specific number of bits.
> >> - ///
> >> - /// A capacity below [`MAX_INLINE_LEN`] is adjusted to [`MAX_INLINE_LEN`].
> >> - ///
> >> - /// [`MAX_INLINE_LEN`]: BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN
> >> #[inline]
> >> pub fn with_capacity(num_ids: usize, flags: Flags) -> Result<Self, AllocError> {
> >> - let num_ids = usize::max(num_ids, BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN);
> >> let map = BitmapVec::new(num_ids, flags)?;
> >> Ok(Self { map })
> >> }
> >> @@ -152,6 +147,13 @@ pub fn capacity(&self) -> usize {
> >> /// let resizer = alloc_request.realloc(GFP_KERNEL)?;
> >> /// pool.shrink(resizer);
> >> /// assert_eq!(pool.capacity(), BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN);
> >> + ///
> >> + /// // A pool at the `MAX_INLINE_LEN` floor cannot shrink further.
> >> + /// assert!(pool.shrink_request().is_none());
> >> + ///
> >> + /// // Neither can a pool with a capacity below `MAX_INLINE_LEN`.
> >> + /// let small = IdPool::with_capacity(8, GFP_KERNEL)?;
> >> + /// assert!(small.shrink_request().is_none());
> >> /// # Ok::<(), AllocError>(())
> >> /// ```
> >> #[inline]
> >> @@ -198,12 +200,36 @@ pub fn shrink(&mut self, mut resizer: PoolResizer) {
> >>
> >> /// Returns a [`ReallocRequest`] for growing this [`IdPool`], if possible.
> >> ///
> >> + /// Grows to at least [`MAX_INLINE_LEN`].
> >> /// The capacity of an [`IdPool`] cannot be grown above [`MAX_LEN`].
> >> ///
> >> + /// [`MAX_INLINE_LEN`]: BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN
> >> /// [`MAX_LEN`]: BitmapVec::MAX_LEN
> >> + ///
> >> + /// # Examples
> >> + ///
> >> + /// ```
> >> + /// use kernel::{
> >> + /// alloc::AllocError,
> >> + /// bitmap::BitmapVec,
> >> + /// id_pool::IdPool, //
> >> + /// };
> >> + ///
> >> + /// // Grow goes to at least BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN.
> >> + /// let mut pool = IdPool::with_capacity(1, GFP_KERNEL)?;
> >> + /// let resizer = pool.grow_request().ok_or(AllocError)?.realloc(GFP_KERNEL)?;
> >> + /// pool.grow(resizer);
> >> + /// assert_eq!(pool.capacity(), BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN);
> >> + ///
> >> + /// // Grow doubles if at least BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN.
> >> + /// let resizer = pool.grow_request().ok_or(AllocError)?.realloc(GFP_KERNEL)?;
> >> + /// pool.grow(resizer);
> >> + /// assert_eq!(pool.capacity(), 2 * BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN);
> >> + /// # Ok::<(), AllocError>(())
> >> + /// ```
> >> #[inline]
> >> pub fn grow_request(&self) -> Option<ReallocRequest> {
> >> - let num_ids = self.capacity() * 2;
> >> + let num_ids = usize::max(BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN, self.capacity() * 2);
> >
> > You only need this max(...) thing to fix the behavior of 0-len bitmap.
> > We don't have any users with the request to support them. Please don't
> > add any extra code to handle unwanted and unsupported cases.
>
> No, this code is a side-effect of the pool not being rounded up to
> `MAX_INLINE_LEN` (note how the `max` moved from `with_capacity). It
> would still be there even if we did not support zero-size.
The commit message says exactly opposite:
This allows specifying a real capacity of 0, which was not previously
possible.
Eliot, can you reword please? We don't have a single use-case for
0-sized bitmap, nor in C, neither in rust. If your code handles such
a bitmap correctly to some extend, it's purely accidentally, and
nobody should rely on it.
> Forbidding zero-sized pools would actually require *more* code in this
> patch to enforce that rule, and would not allow us to remove any in
> exchange afaict.
I trust you here. Maybe declaring nbits in the allocation API as
NonZero would help - IDK... I just want to make sure we're not
bloating the implementation for unneeded and confusing functionality.
Thanks,
Yury
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-11 20:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-09 8:32 [PATCH v11 0/5] rust: Add support for reserving of ranges of IDs Eliot Courtney
2026-11-09 8:32 ` [PATCH v11 1/5] rust: io: use Alignment size constants Eliot Courtney
2026-11-09 12:37 ` Gary Guo
2026-11-10 17:17 ` Yury Norov
2026-11-09 8:32 ` [PATCH v11 2/5] rust: gpu: buddy: " Eliot Courtney
2026-11-09 12:37 ` Gary Guo
2026-11-10 17:21 ` Yury Norov
2026-11-09 8:32 ` [PATCH v11 3/5] gpu: nova-core: " Eliot Courtney
2026-11-09 12:37 ` Gary Guo
2026-11-10 17:22 ` Yury Norov
2026-11-09 8:32 ` [PATCH v11 4/5] rust: id_pool: do not round capacity up to BitmapVec::MAX_INLINE_LEN Eliot Courtney
2026-11-09 12:08 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-11-09 12:36 ` Gary Guo
2026-11-10 7:29 ` Eliot Courtney
2026-11-10 17:42 ` Yury Norov
2026-11-10 22:44 ` Alexandre Courbot
2026-11-11 20:47 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2026-11-09 8:32 ` [PATCH v11 5/5] gpu: nova-core: add ChannelIdPool Eliot Courtney
2026-11-09 21:21 ` (subset) [PATCH v11 0/5] rust: Add support for reserving of ranges of IDs Danilo Krummrich
2026-11-09 21:33 ` Danilo Krummrich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=avTUWznKqpgUI5M-@yury \
--to=ynorov@nvidia.com \
--cc=a.hindborg@kernel.org \
--cc=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=burak.emir@gmail.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel.almeida@collabora.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ecourtney@nvidia.com \
--cc=gary@garyguo.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lossin@kernel.org \
--cc=nova-gpu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tamird@kernel.org \
--cc=tmgross@umich.edu \
--cc=ttabi@nvidia.com \
--cc=work@onurozkan.dev \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=zhiw@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®