linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] docs/mm: Physical Memory: add structure, introduction and nodes description

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <Y8++BJcHgfzuoURl@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2023 13:16:20 +0200
From:   Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] docs/mm: Physical Memory: add structure,
 introduction and nodes description

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 12:00:07PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 1/15/23 19:42, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)" <rppt@...nel.org>
> > 
> > Add structure, introduction and Nodes section to Physical Memory
> > chapter.
> > 
> > As the new documentation references core-api/dma-api and mm/page_reclaim,
> > add page labels to those documents.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>
> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (IBM) <rppt@...nel.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
> 
> A small bug to fix below?
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > +
> > +Along with the node structures, kernel maintains an array of ``nodemask_t``
> > +bitmasks called ``node_states``. Each bitmask in this array represents a set of
> > +nodes with particular properties as defined by ``enum node_states``:
> > +
> > +``N_POSSIBLE``
> > +  The node could become online at some point.
> > +``N_ONLINE``
> > +  The node is online.
> > +``N_NORMAL_MEMORY``
> > +  The node has regular memory.
> > +``N_HIGH_MEMORY``
> > +  The node has regular or high memory. When ``CONFIG_HIGHMEM`` is disabled
> > +  aliased to ``N_NORMAL_MEMORY``.
> 
> Noted.
> 
> > +``N_MEMORY``
> > +  The node has memory(regular, high, movable)
> > +``N_CPU``
> > +  The node has one or more CPUs
> > +
> > +For each node that has a property described above, the bit corresponding to the
> > +node ID in the ``node_states[<property>]`` bitmask is set.
> > +
> > +For example, for node 2 with normal memory and CPUs, bit 2 will be set in ::
> > +
> > +  node_states[N_POSSIBLE]
> > +  node_states[N_ONLINE]
> > +  node_states[N_NORMAL_MEMORY]
> > +  node_states[N_MEMORY]
> > +  node_states[N_CPU]
> 
> Should it be set also in node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY]?
 
You mean because of the aliasing of N_NORMAL_MEMORY and N_HIGH_MEMORY?