Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:15:10 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [-mm][PATCH 2/4] Setup the memrlimit controller (v5) |
| |
On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 19:10:40 +0200 (MEST) Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@gmail.com> wrote:
> Balbir Singh wrote: > > +static int memrlimit_cgroup_write_strategy(char *buf, unsigned long long *tmp) > > +{ > > + *tmp = memparse(buf, &buf); > > + if (*buf != '\0') > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > + *tmp = PAGE_ALIGN(*tmp); > > + return 0; > > +} > > We shouldn't use PAGE_ALIGN() here, otherwise we limit the address space > to 4GB on 32-bit architectures (that could be reasonable, because this > is a per-cgroup limit and not per-process). > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@gmail.com> > --- > mm/memrlimitcgroup.c | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memrlimitcgroup.c b/mm/memrlimitcgroup.c > index 9a03d7d..2d42ff3 100644 > --- a/mm/memrlimitcgroup.c > +++ b/mm/memrlimitcgroup.c > @@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ > #include <linux/res_counter.h> > #include <linux/memrlimitcgroup.h> > > +#define PAGE_ALIGN64(addr) (((((addr)+PAGE_SIZE-1))>>PAGE_SHIFT)<<PAGE_SHIFT) > + > struct cgroup_subsys memrlimit_cgroup_subsys; > > struct memrlimit_cgroup { > @@ -124,7 +126,7 @@ static int memrlimit_cgroup_write_strategy(char *buf, unsigned long long *tmp) > if (*buf != '\0') > return -EINVAL; > > - *tmp = PAGE_ALIGN(*tmp); > + *tmp = PAGE_ALIGN64(*tmp); > return 0; > } >
I don't beleive the change is needed.
#define PAGE_ALIGN(addr) (((addr)+PAGE_SIZE-1)&PAGE_MASK)
that implementation will behaved as desired when passed a 64-bit addr?
| |