[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200911130033.29786.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:33:29 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc: Nigel Cunningham <ncunningham@...a.org.au>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
"linux-mm" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: using highmem for atomic copy of lowmem was Re: [PATCHv2 2/5] vmscan: Kill hibernation specific reclaim logic and unify it
On Thursday 12 November 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > >> (Disclaimer: I don't think about highmem a lot any more, and might have
> > > >> forgotten some of the details, or swsusp's algorithms might have
> > > >> changed. Rafael might need to correct some of this...)
> > > >>
> > > >> Imagine that you have a system with 1000 pages of lowmem and 5000 pages
> > > >> of highmem. Of these, 950 lowmem pages are in use and 500 highmem pages
> > > >> are in use.
> > > >>
> > > >> In order to to be able to save an image, we need to be able to do an
> > > >> atomic copy of those lowmem pages.
> > > >>
> > > >> You might think that we could just copy everything into the spare
> > > >> highmem pages, but we can't because mapping and unmapping the highmem
> > > >> pages as we copy the data will leave us with an inconsistent copy.
> > > >
> > > > This isn't the case any more for the mainline hibernate code. We use highmem
> > > > for storing image data as well as lowmem.
> > >
> > > Highmem for storing copies of lowmem pages?
> >
> > It is possible in theory, but I don't think it happens in practice given the
> > way in which the memory is freed. Still copy_data_page() takes this
> > possibility into account.
>
> Yes, it does, but I wonder if it can ever work...?
>
> copy_data_page() takes great care not to modify any memory -- like
> using handmade loop instead of memcpy() -- yet it uses kmap_atomic()
> and friends.
>
> If kmap_atomic()+kunmap_atomic() pair is guaranteed not to change any
> memory, thats probably safe, but...
It only would be unsafe if the page being copied was changed at the same time,
but the code is designed to avoid that.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists