| Message ID | 1543972551-60951-1-git-send-email-peng.hao2@zte.com.cn (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | kvm/arm: return 0 when the number of objects is not less than min | expand |
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:15:51AM +0800, Peng Hao wrote: > Return 0 when there is enough kvm_mmu_memory_cache object. > > Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@zte.com.cn> > --- > virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > index ed162a6..fcda0ce 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static int mmu_topup_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache, > while (cache->nobjs < max) { > page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); > if (!page) > - return -ENOMEM; > + return cache->nobjs >= min ? 0 : -ENOMEM; This condition will never be true here, as the exact same condition is already checked above, and if it had been true, then we wouldn't be here. What problem are you attempting to solve? > cache->objects[cache->nobjs++] = page; > } > return 0; > -- > 1.8.3.1 > > _______________________________________________ > kvmarm mailing list > kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 09:56:30AM +0800, peng.hao2@zte.com.cn wrote: > >On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:15:51AM +0800, Peng Hao wrote: > >> Return 0 when there is enough kvm_mmu_memory_cache object. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@zte.com.cn> > >> --- > >> virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > >> index ed162a6..fcda0ce 100644 > >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > >> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static int mmu_topup_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache, > >> while (cache->nobjs < max) { > >> page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); > >> if (!page) > >> - return -ENOMEM; > >> + return cache->nobjs >= min ? 0 : -ENOMEM; > > > >This condition will never be true here, as the exact same condition is > >already checked above, and if it had been true, then we wouldn't be here. > > > >What problem are you attempting to solve? > > > if (cache->nobjs >= min) ------here cache->nobjs<min,it can continue downward > return 0; > while (cache->nobjs < max) { > page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); > if (!page) > return -ENOMEM; -----here it is possible that (cache->nobjs >= min) and (cache->nobjs<max) > cache->objects[cache->nobjs++] = page; ---here cache->nobjs increasing > } > > I just think the logic of this function is to return 0 as long as (cache->nobjs >= min). > thanks. Oh, I see now. This is the case where we can do enough allocating to over the min line, but fail before we get to the max. Thanks, drew
On 05/12/2018 08:32, Andrew Jones wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:15:51AM +0800, Peng Hao wrote: >> Return 0 when there is enough kvm_mmu_memory_cache object. >> >> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@zte.com.cn> >> --- >> virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c >> index ed162a6..fcda0ce 100644 >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c >> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static int mmu_topup_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache, >> while (cache->nobjs < max) { >> page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); >> if (!page) >> - return -ENOMEM; >> + return cache->nobjs >= min ? 0 : -ENOMEM; > > This condition will never be true here, as the exact same condition is > already checked above, and if it had been true, then we wouldn't be here. The condition can be true if the loop is executed at least once. This change would appear to allow the call to succeed in the case where the cache can be topped up to at least "min", but not as far as "max". It would be good to know in what situation this has actually been hit though (and indeed whether this has actually been seen) - the system must be very short on memory to need this, and I'd be surprised if further failures didn't happen later on. > What problem are you attempting to solve? > >> cache->objects[cache->nobjs++] = page; >> } >> return 0; >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> kvmarm mailing list >> kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu >> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm > _______________________________________________ > kvmarm mailing list > kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm >
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 09:56:30AM +0800, peng.hao2@zte.com.cn wrote: > >On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 09:15:51AM +0800, Peng Hao wrote: > >> Return 0 when there is enough kvm_mmu_memory_cache object. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@zte.com.cn> > >> --- > >> virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c | 2 +- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > >> index ed162a6..fcda0ce 100644 > >> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > >> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c > >> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static int mmu_topup_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache, > >> while (cache->nobjs < max) { > >> page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); > >> if (!page) > >> - return -ENOMEM; > >> + return cache->nobjs >= min ? 0 : -ENOMEM; > > > >This condition will never be true here, as the exact same condition is > >already checked above, and if it had been true, then we wouldn't be here. > > > >What problem are you attempting to solve? > > > if (cache->nobjs >= min) ------here cache->nobjs<min,it can continue downward > return 0; > while (cache->nobjs < max) { > page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); > if (!page) > return -ENOMEM; -----here it is possible that (cache->nobjs >= min) and (cache->nobjs<max) > cache->objects[cache->nobjs++] = page; ---here cache->nobjs increasing > } > > I just think the logic of this function is to return 0 as long as (cache->nobjs >= min). > thanks. That's not the intention, nor is it on any of the other architectures implementing the same thing (this one goes on the list of stuff we should be sharing between architectures). The idea is that you fill up the cache when it goes below min, and you are always able to fill up to max. If you're not able to fill up to max, then your system is seriously low on memory and continuing to run this VM is not likely to be a good idea, so you might as well tell user space to do something now instead of waiting until the situation is even worse. Thanks, Christoffer
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c index ed162a6..fcda0ce 100644 --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static int mmu_topup_memory_cache(struct kvm_mmu_memory_cache *cache, while (cache->nobjs < max) { page = (void *)__get_free_page(PGALLOC_GFP); if (!page) - return -ENOMEM; + return cache->nobjs >= min ? 0 : -ENOMEM; cache->objects[cache->nobjs++] = page; } return 0;
Return 0 when there is enough kvm_mmu_memory_cache object. Signed-off-by: Peng Hao <peng.hao2@zte.com.cn> --- virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)