lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7] Allow sysfs memory directories to be split
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:45:25 -0500
Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com> wrote:

> This patch introduces the new 'split' file in each memory sysfs
> directory and the associated routines needed to handle splitting
> a directory.
>
> Signed-off-by; Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
> ---

pleae check diff option...


> drivers/base/memory.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/base/memory.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/base/memory.c 2010-07-09 14:23:20.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/base/memory.c 2010-07-09 14:38:09.000000000 -0500
> @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@
>
> static int sections_per_block;
>
> +static int register_memory(struct memory_block *, struct mem_section *,
> + int, enum mem_add_context);
> +
> static inline int base_memory_block_id(int section_nr)
> {
> return (section_nr / sections_per_block) * sections_per_block;
> @@ -309,11 +312,100 @@
> return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", mem->phys_device);
> }
>
> +static void update_memory_block_phys_indexes(struct memory_block *mem)
> +{
> + struct list_head *pos;
> + struct memory_block_section *mbs;
> + unsigned long min_index = 0xffffffff;
> + unsigned long max_index = 0;
> +
> + list_for_each(pos, &mem->sections) {
> + mbs = list_entry(pos, struct memory_block_section, next);
> +
> + if (mbs->phys_index < min_index)
> + min_index = mbs->phys_index;
> +
> + if (mbs->phys_index > max_index)
> + max_index = mbs->phys_index;
> + }
> +
> + mem->start_phys_index = min_index;
> + mem->end_phys_index = max_index;
> +}
> +
> +static ssize_t
> +store_mem_split_block(struct sys_device *dev, struct sysdev_attribute *attr,
> + const char *buf, size_t count)
> +{
> + struct memory_block *mem, *new_mem_blk;
> + struct memory_block_section *mbs;
> + struct list_head *pos, *tmp;
> + struct mem_section *section;
> + int min_scn_nr = 0;
> + int max_scn_nr = 0;
> + int total_scns = 0;
> + int new_blk_min, new_blk_total;
> + int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> + mem = container_of(dev, struct memory_block, sysdev);
> +
> + if (list_is_singular(&mem->sections))
> + return -EINVAL;

What this means ?


> +
> + mutex_lock(&mem->state_mutex);
> +
> + list_for_each(pos, &mem->sections) {
> + mbs = list_entry(pos, struct memory_block_section, next);
> +
> + total_scns++;
> +
> + if (min_scn_nr > mbs->phys_index)
> + min_scn_nr = mbs->phys_index;
> +
> + if (max_scn_nr < mbs->phys_index)
> + max_scn_nr = mbs->phys_index;
> + }
> +
> + new_mem_blk = kzalloc(sizeof(*new_mem_blk), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!new_mem_blk)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + mutex_init(&new_mem_blk->state_mutex);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&new_mem_blk->sections);
> + new_mem_blk->state = mem->state;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&new_mem_blk->state_mutex);
> +
> + new_blk_total = total_scns / 2;
> + new_blk_min = max_scn_nr - new_blk_total + 1;
> +
> + section = __nr_to_section(new_blk_min);
> + ret = register_memory(new_mem_blk, section, 0, HOTPLUG);
> +
'nid' is always 0 ?

And for what purpose this interface is ? Does this split memory block into 2 pieces
of the same size ?? sounds __very__ strange interface to me.

If this is necessary, I hope move the whole things to configfs rather than
something tricky.

Bye.
-Kame



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-07-13 08:35    [W:0.133 / U:0.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site