lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86: split e820 reserved entries record to late v4 - fix
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 9:05 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> try to insert_resource second time, by expand the resource...
>
> I would hold off on this unless it's shown to actually be needed. And _if_
> it is needed, I would just make a new function for doing this all:
> "insert_resource_expand_to_fit()"
>
> That said, I think the insert_resource()/__insert_resource() change is
> pretty ok. However, it doesn't follow the rules, and is racy. The rules
> for resources are:
>
> - the "internal" version (with the "__" prepended) is static to
> resource.c, because it must not be called from outside, which is in
> turn because:
>
> - it must be called with the lock taken by the caller, because otherwise
> returning a "struct resource *" is racy - the resource is not protected
> by anything!
>
> So the "insert_resource_expand_to_fit()" thing would look something like
> this:
>
> void insert_resource_expand_to_fit(struct resource *root, struct resource *new)
> {
> write_lock(&resource_lock);
> while (new->start && new->parent) {
> struct resource *conflict;
>
> conflict = __insert_resource(root, new);
> if (!conflict)
> break;
> if (conflict->start < new->start)
> new->start = conflict->start;
> if (conflict->end > new->end)
> new->end = conflict->end;
> }
> write_unlock(&resource_lock);
> }
>
> but the above is obviously _totally_ untested.
>

good, will build one test stub to test it.

YH


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-29 18:39    [W:0.100 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site