On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:34:34AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 08:31:31PM -0700, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 03:02:24AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 12:50:50PM -0700, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > > + /* the number of CMA page successful allocations */
> > > > + atomic64_t nr_pages_succeeded;
> > >
> > > > +void cma_sysfs_alloc_pages_count(struct cma *cma, size_t count)
> > > > +{
> > > > + atomic64_add(count, &cma->nr_pages_succeeded);
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > I don't understand. A size_t is a byte count. But the variable is called
> > > 'nr_pages'. So which is it, a byte count or a page count?
> >
> > It's page count. I followed the cma_alloc interface since it has
> > size_t count variable for nr_pages.
>
> That's very confusing. cma_alloc is wrong; if it needs to be an
> unsigned long, that's fine. But it shouldn't be size_t.
>
> 7.17 of n1256 defines:
>
> size_t
> which is the unsigned integer type of the result of the sizeof operator
>
> Do you want to submit a patch to fix cma_alloc as well?
Sure, but it will be separate patch.
>
> > Let's go with unsigned long nr_pages:
> > void cma_sysfs_alloc_pages_count(struct cma *cma, unsigned long
> > nr_pages)
>
> Works for me!
Thanks for review!
