Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1488465
| From | zijun_hu <zijun_hu@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() |
| Date | 2016-09-22 01:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <sjYY1-6VQ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <sjHkt-4fQ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sjX5T-5Jq-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sjYlk-6tw-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <sjYuZ-6wT-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 2016/9/22 6:45, David Rientjes wrote: > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, zijun_hu wrote: > >>>> correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() since the else >>>> if condition is always true and meaningless >>>> >>>> in order to fix this issue, if vmap_area inserted is lower than one >>>> on rbtree then walk around left branch; if higher then right branch >>>> otherwise intersects with the other then BUG_ON() is triggered >>>> >>> >>> Under normal operation, you're right that the "else if" conditional should >>> always succeed: we don't want to BUG() unless there's a bug. The original >>> code can catch instances when va->va_start == tmp_va->va_end where we >>> should BUG(). Your code silently ignores it. >>> >> Hmm, the BUG_ON() appears in the original code, i don't introduce it. >> it maybe be better to consider va->va_start == tmp_va->va_end as normal case >> and should not BUG_ON() it since the available range of vmap_erea include >> the start boundary but the end, BTW, represented as [start, end) >> > > We don't support inserting when va->va_start == tmp_va->va_end, plain and > simple. There's no reason to do so. NACK to the patch. > i am sorry i disagree with you because 1) in almost all context of vmalloc, original logic treat the special case as normal for example, __find_vmap_area() or alloc_vmap_area() 2) don't use the limited vmap area effectively, it maybe causes BUG_ON() easy 3) consider below case it provided there have been two vmap_areas [4, 12) and [20, 28), what will happens when alloc_vmap_area(8, 4, 6, 24,...)? should we use [12,20) for our request?
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() zijun_hu <zijun_hu@zoho.com> - 2016-09-21 06:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2016-09-21 23:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() zijun_hu <zijun_hu@zoho.com> - 2016-09-22 00:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2016-09-22 00:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2016-09-22 01:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() zijun_hu <zijun_hu@zoho.com> - 2016-09-22 02:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() zijun_hu <zijun_hu@zoho.com> - 2016-09-22 01:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] mm/vmalloc.c: correct a few logic error for __insert_vmap_area() zijun_hu <zijun_hu@zoho.com> - 2016-09-22 03:40 +0200
csiph-web