[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b191ad4a-da4e-9bc7-4468-d6e4a8b3d66f@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 13:24:43 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, zwisler@...nel.org,
vishal.l.verma@...el.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mhocko@...e.com,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mm/resource: move HMM pr_debug() deeper into resource
code
On 1/25/19 1:18 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 5:21 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> diff -puN kernel/resource.c~move-request_region-check kernel/resource.c
>> --- a/kernel/resource.c~move-request_region-check 2019-01-24 15:13:14.453199539 -0800
>> +++ b/kernel/resource.c 2019-01-24 15:13:14.458199539 -0800
>> @@ -1123,6 +1123,16 @@ struct resource * __request_region(struc
>> conflict = __request_resource(parent, res);
>> if (!conflict)
>> break;
>> + /*
>> + * mm/hmm.c reserves physical addresses which then
>> + * become unavailable to other users. Conflicts are
>> + * not expected. Be verbose if one is encountered.
>> + */
>> + if (conflict->desc == IORES_DESC_DEVICE_PRIVATE_MEMORY) {
>> + pr_debug("Resource conflict with unaddressable "
>> + "device memory at %#010llx !\n",
>> + (unsigned long long)start);
>
> I don't object to the change, but are you really OK with this being a
> pr_debug() message that is only emitted when enabled via either the
> dynamic debug mechanism or DEBUG being defined? From the comments, it
> seems more like a KERN_INFO sort of message.
I left it consistent with the original message that was in the code.
I'm happy to change it, though, if the consumers of it (Jerome,
basically) want something different.
> Also, maybe the message would be more useful if it included the
> conflicting resource as well as the region you're requesting? Many of
> the other callers of request_resource_conflict() have something like
> this:
>
> dev_err(dev, "resource collision: %pR conflicts with %s %pR\n",
> new, conflict->name, conflict);
Seems sane. I was just trying to change as little as possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists