Messages in this thread | | | From | Dan Williams <> | Date | Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:05:25 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mm/memory-failure.c clean up around tk pre-allocation |
| |
Hi Jane, looks good. Checkpatch prompts me to point out a couple more fixups:
This patch is titled:
"mm/memory-failure.c clean up..."
...to match the second patch it should be:
"mm/memory-failure: clean up..."
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 10:26 AM Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> wrote: > > add_to_kill() expects the first 'tk' to be pre-allocated, it makes > subsequent allocations on need basis, this makes the code a bit > difficult to read. Move all the allocation internal to add_to_kill() > and drop the **tk argument. > > Signed-off-by: Jane Chu <jane.chu@oracle.com> > --- > mm/memory-failure.c | 40 +++++++++++++--------------------------- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c > index d9cc660..51d5b20 100644 > --- a/mm/memory-failure.c > +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c > @@ -304,25 +304,19 @@ static unsigned long dev_pagemap_mapping_shift(struct page *page, > /* > * Schedule a process for later kill. > * Uses GFP_ATOMIC allocations to avoid potential recursions in the VM. > - * TBD would GFP_NOIO be enough? > */ > static void add_to_kill(struct task_struct *tsk, struct page *p, > struct vm_area_struct *vma, > - struct list_head *to_kill, > - struct to_kill **tkc) > + struct list_head *to_kill) > { > struct to_kill *tk; > > - if (*tkc) { > - tk = *tkc; > - *tkc = NULL; > - } else { > - tk = kmalloc(sizeof(struct to_kill), GFP_ATOMIC); > - if (!tk) { > - pr_err("Memory failure: Out of memory while machine check handling\n"); > - return; > - } > + tk = kmalloc(sizeof(struct to_kill), GFP_ATOMIC); > + if (!tk) { > + pr_err("Memory failure: Out of memory while machine check handling\n"); > + return; > }
checkpatch points out that this error message can be deleted. According to the commit that added this check (ebfdc40969f2 "checkpatch: attempt to find unnecessary 'out of memory' messages") the kernel already prints a message and a backtrace on these events, so seems like a decent additional cleanup to fold.
With those fixups you can add:
Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
...along with Naoya's ack.
I would Cc: Andrew Morton on the v5 posting of these as he's the upstream path for changes to this file.
| |