Re: [PATCH v5, part3 11/15] mm: use a dedicated lock to protect totalram_pagesand zone->managed_pages

[Jiang Liu]

On 05/08/2013 11:27 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 05/08/2013 11:17 AM, Jiang Liu wrote:
> 
>> @@ -5186,6 +5189,15 @@ early_param("movablecore", cmdline_parse_movablecore);
>>
>>   #endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP */
>>
>> +void adjust_managed_page_count(struct page *page, long count)
>> +{
>> +    spin_lock(&managed_page_count_lock);
>> +    page_zone(page)->managed_pages += count;
>> +    totalram_pages += count;
>> +    spin_unlock(&managed_page_count_lock);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(adjust_managed_page_count);
>> +
> 
> Something I should have thought of when I reviewed the patch
> last time, but forgot...
> 
> What happens when the hotplug event adds more pages than fit
> in this zone, and some of the pages should go in the next
> zone?
> 
> For example, think about a 3GB x86_64 machine, which gets
> 2GB of memory hot-added. Roughly half may get added to the
> DMA32 zone, the rest to the NORMAL zone.
> 
> Do the callers of adjust_managed_page_count correctly make
> one call for each zone, or does the above code open up a
> window for a bug?
Hi Rik,
	Thanks for review! 
	Yes, the caller will make one call for each zone. Actually it will
call adjust_managed_page_count() for each page.
	Regards!
	Gerry
--
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/