Messages in this thread | | | From | Johannes Weiner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Section mismatch contig_page_data and bootmem_node_data | Date | Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:06:32 +0200 |
| |
Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 11:45:00PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote: >> Hi, >> >> > On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:05:41 +0200 >> > Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I thought about this warning today and found 2 other solutions: >> >> 1) Mark contig_page_data as __ref (but it might hide real bugs). >> >> 2) Remove bdata from struct pglist_data and access it directly through >> >> bootmem_node_data. It requires passing node number to all functions >> >> which use bdata, but unfortunately arch/ia64/mm/discontig.c handles >> >> node numbering its own way. I'm still investigating it. >> >> Yeah, I gave it a shot once too but dropped it again after I looked at >> ia64 code. >> >> Perhaps we can just remove the static assignment and do it at boot up? > > That won't work - modpost will warn at different place about section > mismatch. But even if it would work, we lose potentially useful > analysis of all uses of pglist_data->bdata.
Right, but the current way of handling things completely circumvents the section checking, no?
> But I think I found better solution - replace "struct bootmem_data *bdata" > in struct pglist_data with "int bootmem_node;" and change all uses of bdata > to &bootmem_node_data[struct pglist_data *->bootmem_node].
Good idea. You don't even need a new number here, pgdat->node_id should be usable out of the box to index into the bdata array.
> What do you think about it? Would it be acceptable?
Yes, that sounds good.
Hannes
| |