lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Raise maximum number of memory controllers
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 10:50:23AM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote:
> There are way too many places where we use the identifier "bus"
> in the edac core and drivers. But I'm not sure that we need a
> static array mc_bus[EDAC_MAX_MCS].

That, of course, is another way of looking at it which I didn't think
of.

> Why can't we:
>
>
> - mci->bus = &mc_bus[mci->mc_idx];
> + mci->bus = kmalloc(sizeof *(mci->bus), GFP_KERNEL);
>
> and then figure out where to kfree(mci->bus) on driver removal?

AFAICT, in _edac_mc_free(). We free there mci itself so kfree(mci->bus)
can happen directly before it.

> Do we every do arithmetic on different mci->bus pointers that
> assume they are all part of a single array?

AFAICT, we use that thing for the bus_reg/unreg functions and we hand it
back'n'forth in edac_mc_sysfs.c, see

$ git grep -E "mci.*bus" drivers/edac/
drivers/edac/edac_mc.c:763: mci->bus = &mc_bus[mci->mc_idx];
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:408: csrow->dev.bus = mci->bus;
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:639: dimm->dev.bus = mci->bus;
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:928: mci->bus->name = name;
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:930: edac_dbg(0, "creating bus %s\n", mci->bus->name);
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:932: err = bus_register(mci->bus);
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:943: mci->dev.bus = mci->bus;
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:1002: bus_unregister(mci->bus);
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:1035: struct bus_type *bus = mci->bus;
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:1036: const char *name = mci->bus->name;
drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c:1071: mci_pdev->bus = edac_get_sysfs_subsys();
drivers/edac/i5100_edac.c:967: priv->debugfs = edac_debugfs_create_dir_at(mci->bus->name, i5100_debugfs);
drivers/edac/i7core_edac.c:1170: pvt->addrmatch_dev->bus = mci->dev.bus;
drivers/edac/i7core_edac.c:1191: pvt->chancounts_dev->bus = mci->dev.bus;

HOWEVER, look at

88d84ac97378 ("EDAC: Fix lockdep splat")

Now I remember. I did that for lockdep because it wants statically
allocated memory. I'll try to think of something tomorrow.

Thx.

--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-25 20:09    [W:0.142 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site