On 7/27/23 2:55 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 27-07-23 13:32:31, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> With memmap on memory, some architecture needs more details w.r.t altmap
>> such as base_pfn, end_pfn, etc to unmap vmemmap memory. Instead of
>> computing them again when we remove a memory block, embed vmem_altmap
>> details in struct memory_block if we are using memmap on memory block
>> feature.
>>
>> No functional change in this patch
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.ku...@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/base/memory.c | 25 +++++++++++-------
>> include/linux/memory.h | 8 ++----
>> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>> 3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/memory.c b/drivers/base/memory.c
>> index b456ac213610..57ed61212277 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/memory.c
>> +++ b/drivers/base/memory.c
>> @@ -106,6 +106,7 @@ static void memory_block_release(struct device *dev)
>> {
>> struct memory_block *mem = to_memory_block(dev);
>>
>> + WARN_ON(mem->altmap);
>
> What is this supposed to catch? A comment would be handy so that we know
> what to look at should it ever trigger.
>
I did add a comment where we clear the altmap in try_remove_memory(). I will
also add
more details here.
+ * Mark altmap NULL so that we can add a debug
+ * check on memblock free.
*/
WARN_ON is an indication of memory leak because if we have mem->altmap != NULL
then the allocated altmap is not freed . It also indicate that memblock got
freed
without going through the try_remove_memory().
>> kfree(mem);
>> }
=aneesh
