[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181016143016.10da89bd@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 14:30:16 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Chris Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH for 4.21 04/16] mm: Introduce vm_map_user_ram,
vm_unmap_user_ram
On Wed, 10 Oct 2018 15:19:24 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> + * vm_unmap_user_ram - unmap linear kernel address space set up by vm_map_user_ram
> + * @mem: the pointer returned by vm_map_user_ram
> + * @count: the count passed to that vm_map_user_ram call (cannot unmap partial)
> + */
> +void vm_unmap_user_ram(const void *mem, unsigned int count)
> +{
> + unsigned long size = (unsigned long)count << PAGE_SHIFT;
> + unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)mem;
> + struct vmap_area *va;
> +
> + might_sleep();
> + BUG_ON(!addr);
> + BUG_ON(addr < VMALLOC_START);
> + BUG_ON(addr > VMALLOC_END);
> + BUG_ON(!PAGE_ALIGNED(addr));
> +
> + debug_check_no_locks_freed(mem, size);
> + va = find_vmap_area(addr);
> + BUG_ON(!va);
> + free_unmap_vmap_area(va);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(vm_unmap_user_ram);
> +
Noticing this from Sergey's question in another patch, why are you
using BUG_ON()? That's rather extreme and something we are trying to
avoid adding more of (I still need to remove the BUG_ON()s I've added
over ten years ago). I don't see why all these BUG_ON's can't be turned
into:
if (WARN_ON(x))
return;
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists