Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] hotplug-memory: refactor online_pages to separate zone growth from page onlining | | From | Dave Hansen <> | | Date | Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:47:02 -0700 |
| |
On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 17:00 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > The Xen balloon driver needs to separate the process of hot-installing > memory into two phases: one to allocate the page structures and > configure the zones, and another to actually online the pages of newly > installed memory. > > This patch splits up the innards of online_pages() into two pieces which > correspond to these two phases. The behaviour of online_pages() itself > is unchanged. ... > --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c > +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > @@ -180,31 +180,35 @@ > return 0; > } > > - > -int online_pages(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) > +/* Tell anyone who's interested that we're onlining some memory */ > +static int notify_going_online(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) > { > - unsigned long flags; > - unsigned long onlined_pages = 0; > - struct zone *zone; > - int need_zonelists_rebuild = 0; > + struct memory_notify arg; > int nid; > int ret; > - struct memory_notify arg; > > arg.start_pfn = pfn; > arg.nr_pages = nr_pages; > arg.status_change_nid = -1; > - > + > nid = page_to_nid(pfn_to_page(pfn)); > if (node_present_pages(nid) == 0) > arg.status_change_nid = nid;
That's kind a weird line in the patch. How'd that get there? Why are you moving 'arg'?
This look OK, but it does add ~45 lines of code, and I'm not immediately sure how you're going to use it. Could you address that a bit?
I do kinda wish you'd take a real hard look at what the new functions are doing now. I'm not sure their current names are very good.
> +/* Grow the zone to fit the expected amount of memory being added */ > +static struct zone *online_pages_zone(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
The comment is good, but the function name is not. :) How about grow_zone_span() or something?
> +/* Mark a set of pages as online */ > +unsigned long mark_pages_onlined(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
Isn't the comment on this one a bit redundant? :)
This looks to me to have become the real online_pages() now. This function is what goes and individually onlines pages. If someone was trying to figure out whether to call online_pages() or mark_pages_onlined(), which one would they know to call?
> - if (onlined_pages) > + if (onlined_pages) { > + struct memory_notify arg; > + > + arg.start_pfn = pfn; /* ? */ > + arg.nr_pages = onlined_pages; > + arg.status_change_nid = -1; /* ? */ > + > memory_notify(MEM_ONLINE, &arg); > + }
We should really wrap up memory notify:
static void memory_notify(int state, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages, int status_change_nid) { struct memory_notify arg; arg.start_pfn = start_pfn; arg.nr_pages = nr_pages; arg.status_change_nid = status_change_nid; return the_current_memory_notify(state, &arg); }
We can use that in a couple of spots, right?
-- Dave
|  |