Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 23 Jul 2014 11:07:40 -0700 | Subject | Re: Random panic in load_balance() with 3.16-rc | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > A cpumask_var is TOTALLY DIFFERENT. It's *either* a cpumask _or_ just > a pointer to an externally allocated cpumask. > > sched_init() definitely does _not_ allocate a cpumask_var.
I take that back. It does end up allocating it properly, it just avoids all the correct abstractions.
In general, the rule of thumb should be:
- stack allocations should use "cpumask_var_t cpus" and they absolutely *have* to be paired with an "alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus, GFP_KERNEL)". Having a "struct cpumask" on stack is very wrong.
- random single nonstack allocations should probably just use a plain "struct cpumask" (or cpumask_t, but we really shouldn't use typedef's unless they actively abstract some per-config *changing* type).
- dynamic allocations that are size-conscious (because there's a lot of them) should allocate a "struct cpumask *" by using "cpumask_size()". They have a pointer anyway, they allocate things dynamically anyway, extra indirection through a cpumask_var_t would just be unnecessary.
- *static* per-cpu allocations might want to use "cpumask_var_t" (to avoid having a full "struct cpumask_t") along with doing a "zalloc_cpumask_var_node(..)" for each cpu.
sched_init() follows that last pattern, except it open-codes that zalloc_cpumask_var_node() in an odd way that confused me.
So I take my patch back. It's wrong, because it only allocates that cpumask_size() if CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK is true.
Ugh, that code really is unreadable.
Linus
| |