[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1358854984-6073-3-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:43:01 +0800
From: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
len.brown@...el.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
cl@...ux.com, minchan.kim@...il.com,
kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com,
wujianguo@...wei.com, wency@...fujitsu.com, hpa@...or.com,
linfeng@...fujitsu.com, laijs@...fujitsu.com, mgorman@...e.de,
yinghai@...nel.org, glommer@...allels.com, jiang.liu@...wei.com,
julian.calaby@...il.com, sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH Bug fix 2/5] Bug-fix: mempolicy: fix is_valid_nodemask()
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
is_valid_nodemask() is introduced by 19770b32. but it does not match
its comments, because it does not check the zone which > policy_zone.
Also in b377fd, this commits told us, if highest zone is ZONE_MOVABLE,
we should also apply memory policies to it. so ZONE_MOVABLE should be valid zone
for policies. is_valid_nodemask() need to be changed to match it.
Fix: check all zones, even its zoneid > policy_zone.
Use nodes_intersects() instead open code to check it.
Reported-by: Wen Congyang <wency@...fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
---
mm/mempolicy.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index af8a121..6f7979c 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -161,19 +161,7 @@ static const struct mempolicy_operations {
/* Check that the nodemask contains at least one populated zone */
static int is_valid_nodemask(const nodemask_t *nodemask)
{
- int nd, k;
-
- for_each_node_mask(nd, *nodemask) {
- struct zone *z;
-
- for (k = 0; k <= policy_zone; k++) {
- z = &NODE_DATA(nd)->node_zones[k];
- if (z->managed_pages > 0)
- return 1;
- }
- }
-
- return 0;
+ return nodes_intersects(*nodemask, node_states[N_MEMORY]);
}
static inline int mpol_store_user_nodemask(const struct mempolicy *pol)
@@ -1644,6 +1632,26 @@ struct mempolicy *get_vma_policy(struct task_struct *task,
return pol;
}
+static int apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone)
+{
+ enum zone_type dynamic_policy_zone = policy_zone;
+
+ BUG_ON(dynamic_policy_zone == ZONE_MOVABLE);
+
+ /*
+ * if policy->v.nodes has movable memory only,
+ * we apply policy when gfp_zone(gfp) = ZONE_MOVABLE only.
+ *
+ * policy->v.nodes is intersect with node_states[N_MEMORY].
+ * so if the following test faile, it implies
+ * policy->v.nodes has movable memory only.
+ */
+ if (!nodes_intersects(policy->v.nodes, node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]))
+ dynamic_policy_zone = ZONE_MOVABLE;
+
+ return zone >= dynamic_policy_zone;
+}
+
/*
* Return a nodemask representing a mempolicy for filtering nodes for
* page allocation
@@ -1652,7 +1660,7 @@ static nodemask_t *policy_nodemask(gfp_t gfp, struct mempolicy *policy)
{
/* Lower zones don't get a nodemask applied for MPOL_BIND */
if (unlikely(policy->mode == MPOL_BIND) &&
- gfp_zone(gfp) >= policy_zone &&
+ apply_policy_zone(policy, gfp_zone(gfp)) &&
cpuset_nodemask_valid_mems_allowed(&policy->v.nodes))
return &policy->v.nodes;
--
1.7.1
--
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