In the next patch, you introduce a mutex for adding/removing memory blocks.
Is there really a need for this to be atomic? If you reorder the patches
so the mutex comes first, would the atomic be needed any longer?
Robin
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 02:22:24PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
> Add a section count property to the memory_block struct to track the number
> of memory sections that have been added/removed from a memory block. This
> allows us to know when the last memory section of a memory block has been
> removed so we can remove the memory block.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Fontenot <nf...@austin.ibm.com>
>
> ---
> drivers/base/memory.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> include/linux/memory.h | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-next/drivers/base/memory.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-next.orig/drivers/base/memory.c 2010-09-27 09:17:20.000000000
> -0500
> +++ linux-next/drivers/base/memory.c 2010-09-27 09:31:35.000000000 -0500
> @@ -478,6 +478,7 @@
>
> mem->phys_index = __section_nr(section);
> mem->state = state;
> + atomic_inc(&mem->section_count);
> mutex_init(&mem->state_mutex);
> start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem->phys_index);
> mem->phys_device = arch_get_memory_phys_device(start_pfn);
> @@ -505,12 +506,15 @@
> struct memory_block *mem;
>
> mem = find_memory_block(section);
> - unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(mem);
> - mem_remove_simple_file(mem, phys_index);
> - mem_remove_simple_file(mem, state);
> - mem_remove_simple_file(mem, phys_device);
> - mem_remove_simple_file(mem, removable);
> - unregister_memory(mem, section);
> +
> + if (atomic_dec_and_test(&mem->section_count)) {
> + unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes(mem);
> + mem_remove_simple_file(mem, phys_index);
> + mem_remove_simple_file(mem, state);
> + mem_remove_simple_file(mem, phys_device);
> + mem_remove_simple_file(mem, removable);
> + unregister_memory(mem, section);
> + }
>
> return 0;
> }
> Index: linux-next/include/linux/memory.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-next.orig/include/linux/memory.h 2010-09-27 09:17:20.000000000
> -0500
> +++ linux-next/include/linux/memory.h 2010-09-27 09:22:56.000000000 -0500
> @@ -19,10 +19,13 @@
> #include <linux/node.h>
> #include <linux/compiler.h>
> #include <linux/mutex.h>
> +#include <asm/atomic.h>
>
> struct memory_block {
> unsigned long phys_index;
> unsigned long state;
> + atomic_t section_count;
> +
> /*
> * This serializes all state change requests. It isn't
> * held during creation because the control files are
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
