From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
"Widawsky, Ben" <ben.widawsky@intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch v2 2/4] mm/mempolicy: unify the preprocessing for mbind and set_mempolicy
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 16:32:43 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210524083243.GA11142@shbuild999.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210524055939.GB48704@shbuild999.sh.intel.com>
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 01:59:39PM +0800, Tang, Feng wrote:
> On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 10:16:11PM -0700, David Rientjes wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 May 2021, Feng Tang wrote:
> >
> > > Currently the kernel_mbind() and kernel_set_mempolicy() do almost
> > > the same operation for parameter sanity check and preprocessing.
> > >
> > > Add a macro to unify the code to reduce the redundancy, and make
> > > it easier for changing the pre-processing code in future.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/mempolicy.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
> > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> > > index 1964cca..0f5bf60 100644
> > > --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> > > +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> > > @@ -1460,25 +1460,29 @@ static int copy_nodes_to_user(unsigned long __user *mask, unsigned long maxnode,
> > > return copy_to_user(mask, nodes_addr(*nodes), copy) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +#define MPOL_PRE_PROCESS() \
> >
> > This should be extracted to helper function returning bool, not a macro.
>
> Yes, initially I did try it with an inline function, but as a function
> it has quite several input parameters and several output parameters,
> which made the code still big and ugly.
>
> But if community think it's the right direction to go, I can change it.
Following is a patch to unify the preprocssing by using a helper function,
please review, thanks
- Feng
---
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index d79fa299b70c..8e4f47f925b6 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1460,6 +1460,20 @@ static int copy_nodes_to_user(unsigned long __user *mask, unsigned long maxnode,
return copy_to_user(mask, nodes_addr(*nodes), copy) ? -EFAULT : 0;
}
+static inline int mpol_pre_process(int *mode, const unsigned long __user *nmask, unsigned long maxnode, nodemask_t *nodes, unsigned short *flags)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ *flags = *mode & MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
+ *mode &= ~MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
+ if ((unsigned int)(*mode) >= MPOL_MAX)
+ return -EINVAL;
+ if ((*flags & MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES) && (*flags & MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES))
+ return -EINVAL;
+ ret = get_nodes(nodes, nmask, maxnode);
+ return ret;
+}
+
static long kernel_mbind(unsigned long start, unsigned long len,
unsigned long mode, const unsigned long __user *nmask,
unsigned long maxnode, unsigned int flags)
@@ -1467,19 +1481,14 @@ static long kernel_mbind(unsigned long start, unsigned long len,
nodemask_t nodes;
int err;
unsigned short mode_flags;
+ int lmode = mode;
- start = untagged_addr(start);
- mode_flags = mode & MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
- mode &= ~MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
- if (mode >= MPOL_MAX)
- return -EINVAL;
- if ((mode_flags & MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES) &&
- (mode_flags & MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES))
- return -EINVAL;
- err = get_nodes(&nodes, nmask, maxnode);
+ err = mpol_pre_process(&lmode, nmask, maxnode, &nodes, &mode_flags);
if (err)
return err;
- return do_mbind(start, len, mode, mode_flags, &nodes, flags);
+
+ start = untagged_addr(start);
+ return do_mbind(start, len, lmode, mode_flags, &nodes, flags);
}
SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mbind, unsigned long, start, unsigned long, len,
@@ -1495,18 +1504,14 @@ static long kernel_set_mempolicy(int mode, const unsigned long __user *nmask,
{
int err;
nodemask_t nodes;
- unsigned short flags;
+ unsigned short mode_flags;
+ int lmode = mode;
- flags = mode & MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
- mode &= ~MPOL_MODE_FLAGS;
- if ((unsigned int)mode >= MPOL_MAX)
- return -EINVAL;
- if ((flags & MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES) && (flags & MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES))
- return -EINVAL;
- err = get_nodes(&nodes, nmask, maxnode);
+ err = mpol_pre_process(&lmode, nmask, maxnode, &nodes, &mode_flags);
if (err)
return err;
- return do_set_mempolicy(mode, flags, &nodes);
+
+ return do_set_mempolicy(lmode, mode_flags, &nodes);
}
SYSCALL_DEFINE3(set_mempolicy, int, mode, const unsigned long __user *, nmask,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-24 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-20 8:30 [RFC Patch v2 0/4] mm/mempolicy: some fix and semantics cleanup Feng Tang
2021-05-20 8:30 ` [RFC Patch v2 1/4] mm/mempolicy: skip nodemask intersect check for 'interleave' when oom Feng Tang
2021-05-24 5:15 ` David Rientjes
2021-05-24 5:55 ` Feng Tang
2021-05-20 8:30 ` [RFC Patch v2 2/4] mm/mempolicy: unify the preprocessing for mbind and set_mempolicy Feng Tang
2021-05-24 5:16 ` David Rientjes
2021-05-24 5:59 ` Feng Tang
2021-05-24 8:32 ` Feng Tang [this message]
2021-05-20 8:30 ` [RFC Patch v2 3/4] mm/mempolicy: don't handle MPOL_LOCAL like a fake MPOL_PREFERRED policy Feng Tang
2021-05-20 8:30 ` [RFC Patch v2 4/4] mm/mempolicy: kill MPOL_F_LOCAL bit Feng Tang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210524083243.GA11142@shbuild999.sh.intel.com \
--to=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox