Skip to content

R
raspberrypi-kernel

openeuler / raspberrypi-kernel

通知 13
Star 1
Fork 0
R
raspberrypi-kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 10 10月, 2017 4 次提交
  3. 07 10月, 2017 7 次提交
  5. 29 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  7. 25 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  9. 22 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  11. 18 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  13. 14 9月, 2017 1 次提交
    • M
      mm: treewide: remove GFP_TEMPORARY allocation flag · 0ee931c4
      由 Michal Hocko 提交于 
      GFP_TEMPORARY was introduced by commit e12ba74d ("Group short-lived
and reclaimable kernel allocations") along with __GFP_RECLAIMABLE.  It's
primary motivation was to allow users to tell that an allocation is
short lived and so the allocator can try to place such allocations close
together and prevent long term fragmentation.  As much as this sounds
like a reasonable semantic it becomes much less clear when to use the
highlevel GFP_TEMPORARY allocation flag.  How long is temporary? Can the
context holding that memory sleep? Can it take locks? It seems there is
no good answer for those questions.

The current implementation of GFP_TEMPORARY is basically GFP_KERNEL |
__GFP_RECLAIMABLE which in itself is tricky because basically none of
the existing caller provide a way to reclaim the allocated memory.  So
this is rather misleading and hard to evaluate for any benefits.

I have checked some random users and none of them has added the flag
with a specific justification.  I suspect most of them just copied from
other existing users and others just thought it might be a good idea to
use without any measuring.  This suggests that GFP_TEMPORARY just
motivates for cargo cult usage without any reasoning.

I believe that our gfp flags are quite complex already and especially
those with highlevel semantic should be clearly defined to prevent from
confusion and abuse.  Therefore I propose dropping GFP_TEMPORARY and
replace all existing users to simply use GFP_KERNEL.  Please note that
SLAB users with shrinkers will still get __GFP_RECLAIMABLE heuristic and
so they will be placed properly for memory fragmentation prevention.

I can see reasons we might want some gfp flag to reflect shorterm
allocations but I propose starting from a clear semantic definition and
only then add users with proper justification.

This was been brought up before LSF this year by Matthew [1] and it
turned out that GFP_TEMPORARY really doesn't have a clear semantic.  It
seems to be a heuristic without any measured advantage for most (if not
all) its current users.  The follow up discussion has revealed that
opinions on what might be temporary allocation differ a lot between
developers.  So rather than trying to tweak existing users into a
semantic which they haven't expected I propose to simply remove the flag
and start from scratch if we really need a semantic for short term
allocations.

[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170118054945.GD18349@bombadil.infradead.org

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix typo]
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
[sfr@canb.auug.org.au: drm/i915: fix up]
  Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170816144703.378d4f4d@canb.auug.org.au
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170728091904.14627-1-mhocko@kernel.orgSigned-off-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: NStephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Acked-by: NMel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Acked-by: NVlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      0ee931c4
  15. 08 9月, 2017 2 次提交
  17. 07 9月, 2017 3 次提交
  19. 06 9月, 2017 1 次提交
  21. 05 9月, 2017 2 次提交
    • V
      drm/i915: io unmap functions want __iomem · afe722be
      由 Ville Syrjälä 提交于 
      Don't cast away the __iomem from the io_mapping functions so that
sparse won't be so unhappy when we pass the pointer to the unmap
functions. Instead let's move the cast to where we actually use the
pointer.

Fixes the following sparse warnings:
i915_gem.c:1022:33: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:1022:33:    expected void [noderef] <asn:2>*vaddr
i915_gem.c:1022:33:    got void *[assigned] vaddr
i915_gem.c:1027:34: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:1027:34:    expected void [noderef] <asn:2>*vaddr
i915_gem.c:1027:34:    got void *[assigned] vaddr
i915_gem.c:1199:33: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:1199:33:    expected void [noderef] <asn:2>*vaddr
i915_gem.c:1199:33:    got void *[assigned] vaddr
i915_gem.c:1204:34: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:1204:34:    expected void [noderef] <asn:2>*vaddr
i915_gem.c:1204:34:    got void *[assigned] vaddr

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: NVille Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20170901171252.31025-2-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.comReviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      afe722be
    • V
      drm/i915: Add __rcu to radix tree slot pointer · c23aa71b
      由 Ville Syrjälä 提交于 
      radix_tree_for_each_slot() wants an __rcu annotated pointer for the
slot. So let's add the annotation.

Fixes the following sparse warnings:
i915_gem.c:2217:9: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    expected void **slot
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    got void [noderef] <asn:4>**
i915_gem.c:2217:9: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    expected void **slot
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    got void [noderef] <asn:4>**
i915_gem.c:2217:9: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    expected void [noderef] <asn:4>**slot
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    got void **slot
i915_gem.c:2217:9: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    expected void **slot
i915_gem.c:2217:9:    got void [noderef] <asn:4>**

Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Fixes: 96d77634 ("drm/i915: Use a radixtree for random access to the object's backing storage")
Signed-off-by: NVille Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20170901171252.31025-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.comReviewed-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      c23aa71b
  23. 31 8月, 2017 3 次提交
  25. 30 8月, 2017 1 次提交
  27. 29 8月, 2017 4 次提交
  29. 24 8月, 2017 3 次提交
  31. 18 8月, 2017 1 次提交
    • C
      drm/i915: Replace execbuf vma ht with an idr · d1b48c1e
      由 Chris Wilson 提交于 
      This was the competing idea long ago, but it was only with the rewrite
of the idr as an radixtree and using the radixtree directly ourselves,
along with the realisation that we can store the vma directly in the
radixtree and only need a list for the reverse mapping, that made the
patch performant enough to displace using a hashtable. Though the vma ht
is fast and doesn't require any extra allocation (as we can embed the node
inside the vma), it does require a thread for resizing and serialization
and will have the occasional slow lookup. That is hairy enough to
investigate alternatives and favour them if equivalent in peak performance.
One advantage of allocating an indirection entry is that we can support a
single shared bo between many clients, something that was done on a
first-come first-serve basis for shared GGTT vma previously. To offset
the extra allocations, we create yet another kmem_cache for them.
Signed-off-by: NChris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: NTvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20170816085210.4199-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
      d1b48c1e
  33. 15 8月, 2017 2 次提交
  35. 27 7月, 2017 2 次提交