linux-kernel - [PATCH 20/50] memblock: split memblock_find_base() out of __memblock_alloc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1279005044-24777-21-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org>
Date:	Tue, 13 Jul 2010 00:10:14 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 20/50] memblock: split memblock_find_base() out of __memblock_alloc_base()

From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>

This will be used by the array resize code and might prove useful
to some arch code as well at which point it can be made non-static.

Also add comment as to why aligning size is important

[ Yinghai Lu ]: it should return MEMBLOCK_ERROR when it fail to find a range

Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
---
 mm/memblock.c |   58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
index 1283893..17403e6 100644
--- a/mm/memblock.c
+++ b/mm/memblock.c
@@ -345,12 +345,15 @@ phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int n
 
 	BUG_ON(0 == size);
 
+	/* We align the size to limit fragmentation. Without this, a lot of
+	 * small allocs quickly eat up the whole reserve array on sparc
+	 */
+	size = memblock_align_up(size, align);
+
 	/* We do a bottom-up search for a region with the right
 	 * nid since that's easier considering how memblock_nid_range()
 	 * works
 	 */
-	size = memblock_align_up(size, align);
-
 	for (i = 0; i < mem->cnt; i++) {
 		phys_addr_t ret = memblock_alloc_nid_region(&mem->regions[i],
 					       size, align, nid);
@@ -366,20 +369,7 @@ phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
 	return memblock_alloc_base(size, align, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE);
 }
 
-phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
-{
-	phys_addr_t alloc;
-
-	alloc = __memblock_alloc_base(size, align, max_addr);
-
-	if (alloc == 0)
-		panic("ERROR: Failed to allocate 0x%llx bytes below 0x%llx.\n",
-		      (unsigned long long) size, (unsigned long long) max_addr);
-
-	return alloc;
-}
-
-phys_addr_t __init __memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
+static phys_addr_t __init memblock_find_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
 {
 	long i;
 	phys_addr_t base = 0;
@@ -387,8 +377,6 @@ phys_addr_t __init __memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, ph
 
 	BUG_ON(0 == size);
 
-	size = memblock_align_up(size, align);
-
 	/* Pump up max_addr */
 	if (max_addr == MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE)
 		max_addr = memblock.current_limit;
@@ -405,13 +393,43 @@ phys_addr_t __init __memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, ph
 			continue;
 		base = min(memblockbase + memblocksize, max_addr);
 		res_base = memblock_find_region(memblockbase, base, size, align);
-		if (res_base != MEMBLOCK_ERROR &&
-		    memblock_add_region(&memblock.reserved, res_base, size) >= 0)
+		if (res_base != MEMBLOCK_ERROR)
 			return res_base;
 	}
+	return MEMBLOCK_ERROR;
+}
+
+phys_addr_t __init __memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
+{	
+	phys_addr_t found;
+
+	/* We align the size to limit fragmentation. Without this, a lot of
+	 * small allocs quickly eat up the whole reserve array on sparc
+	 */
+	size = memblock_align_up(size, align);
+
+	found = memblock_find_base(size, align, max_addr);
+	if (found != MEMBLOCK_ERROR &&
+	    memblock_add_region(&memblock.reserved, found, size) >= 0)
+		return found;
+
 	return 0;
 }
 
+phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
+{
+	phys_addr_t alloc;
+
+	alloc = __memblock_alloc_base(size, align, max_addr);
+
+	if (alloc == 0)
+		panic("ERROR: Failed to allocate 0x%llx bytes below 0x%llx.\n",
+		      (unsigned long long) size, (unsigned long long) max_addr);
+
+	return alloc;
+}
+
+
 /* You must call memblock_analyze() before this. */
 phys_addr_t __init memblock_phys_mem_size(void)
 {
-- 
1.6.4.2

--
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/