Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965013Ab3DHOhG (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:37:06 -0400 Received: from g4t0017.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.20]:28158 "EHLO g4t0017.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964984Ab3DHOhE (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:37:04 -0400 Message-ID: <1365431076.2186.1.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] resource: Add release_mem_region_adjustable() From: Toshi Kani To: Ram Pai Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tmac@hp.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com, jiang.liu@huawei.com Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 08:24:36 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20130407040136.GA13533@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> References: <1364919450-8741-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <1364919450-8741-3-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <20130403053720.GA26398@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <1365018905.11159.113.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <20130404064849.GA5709@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> <1365084464.11159.118.camel@misato.fc.hp.com> <20130407040136.GA13533@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4 (3.6.4-3.fc18) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3134 Lines: 82 On Sun, 2013-04-07 at 12:01 +0800, Ram Pai wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 08:07:44AM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 14:48 +0800, Ram Pai wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 01:55:05PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 13:37 +0800, Ram Pai wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 10:17:29AM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > > > > > + while ((res = *p)) { > > > > > > ...snip... > > > > > > > > > + if (res->start > start || res->end < end) { > > > > > > > > > > This check looks sub-optimal; possbily wrong, to me. if the res->start > > > > > is greater than 'start', then obviously its sibling's start will > > > > > also be greater than 'start'. So it will loop through all the > > > > > resources unnecesarily. > > > > > > > > I think this check is necessary to check if the requested range fits > > > > into a resource. It needs to check both sides to verify this. I will > > > > add some comment on this check. > > > > > > > > > you might want something like > > > > > > > > > > if (start >= res->end) { > > > > > > > > I agree that this list is sorted, so we can optimize an error case (i.e. > > > > no matching entry is found) with an additional check. I will add the > > > > following check at the beginning of the while loop. > > > > > > > > if (res->start >= end) > > > > break; > > > > > > > > I also realized that the function returns 0 when no matching entry is > > > > found. I will change it to return -EINVAL as well. > > > > > > ok. this will take care of it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + p = &res->sibling; > > > > > > + continue; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > + > > > > > > + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) { > > > > > > + ret = -EINVAL; > > > > > > + break; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > + > > > > > > + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_BUSY)) { > > > > > > + p = &res->child; > > > > > > + continue; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > + > > > > > > + if (res->start == start && res->end == end) { > > > > > > + /* free the whole entry */ > > > > > > + *p = res->sibling; > > > > > > + kfree(res); > > > > > > > > > > This is incomplete. the prev resource's sibling should now point to > > > > > this resource's sibling. The parent's child has to be updated if > > > > > this resource is the first child resource. no? > > > > > > > > If this resource is the first child, *p is set to &parent->child. So, > > > > it will update the parents' child. > > > > > > But if the resource is not the parent's first child? will it update the > > > previous siblings ->sibling ? > > > > Yes. When it continues in the while loop, p is set to &res->sibling. > > So, it will update the previous sibling's ->sibling. > > You are right. It does update the pointers correctly. I mis-read the > code. No problem. Thanks for reviewing it! -Toshi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/