Re: [PATCH 04/12] mm: alloc_contig_freed_pages() added

From: Michal Nazarewicz
Date: Thu Mar 31 2011 - 18:51:41 EST


On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:26:51 +0200, Dave Hansen <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 00:18 +0200, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 23:14:38 +0200, Dave Hansen wrote:
> We BUG_ON() in bootmem. Basically if we try to allocate an early-boot
> structure and fail, we're screwed. We can't keep running without an
> inode hash, or a mem_map[].
>
> This looks like it's going to at least get partially used in drivers, at
> least from the examples. Are these kinds of things that, if the driver
> fails to load, that the system is useless and hosed? Or, is it
> something where we might limp along to figure out what went wrong before
> we reboot?

Bug in the above place does not mean that we could not allocate memory. It means caller is broken.

Could you explain that a bit?

Is this a case where a device is mapped to a very *specific* range of
physical memory and no where else? What are the reasons for not marking
it off limits at boot? I also saw some bits of isolation and migration
in those patches. Can't the migration fail?

The function is called from alloc_contig_range() (see patch 05/12) which
makes sure that the PFN is valid. Situation where there is not enough
space is caught earlier in alloc_contig_range().

alloc_contig_freed_pages() must be given a valid PFN range such that all
the pages in that range are free (as in are within the region tracked by
page allocator) and of MIGRATETYPE_ISOLATE so that page allocator won't
touch them.

That's why invalid PFN is a bug in the caller and not an exception that
has to be handled.

Also, the function is not called during boot time. It is called while
system is already running.

--
Best regards, _ _
.o. | Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o
..o | Computer Science, Michal "mina86" Nazarewicz (o o)
ooo +-----<email/xmpp: mnazarewicz@xxxxxxxxxx>-----ooO--(_)--Ooo--
--
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/