lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 03/18] mm, hugetlb: unify region structure handling
Date
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> writes:

> Currently, to track a reserved and allocated region, we use two different
> ways for MAP_SHARED and MAP_PRIVATE. For MAP_SHARED, we use
> address_mapping's private_list and, for MAP_PRIVATE, we use a resv_map.
> Now, we are preparing to change a coarse grained lock which protect
> a region structure to fine grained lock, and this difference hinder it.
> So, before changing it, unify region structure handling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
>
> diff --git a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> index a3f868a..a1ae3ada 100644
> --- a/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> @@ -366,7 +366,12 @@ static void truncate_hugepages(struct inode *inode, loff_t lstart)
>
> static void hugetlbfs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode)
> {
> + struct resv_map *resv_map;
> +
> truncate_hugepages(inode, 0);
> + resv_map = (struct resv_map *)inode->i_mapping->private_data;
> + if (resv_map)

can resv_map == NULL ?


> + kref_put(&resv_map->refs, resv_map_release);

Also the kref_put is confusing. For shared mapping we don't have ref
count incremented right ? So may be you can directly call
resv_map_release or add a comment around explaining this more ?


> clear_inode(inode);
> }
>
> @@ -468,6 +473,11 @@ static struct inode *hugetlbfs_get_inode(struct super_block *sb,
> umode_t mode, dev_t dev)
> {
> struct inode *inode;
> + struct resv_map *resv_map;
> +
> + resv_map = resv_map_alloc();
> + if (!resv_map)
> + return NULL;

-aneesh



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-30 20:01    [W:0.148 / U:6.592 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site