| Message ID | 1401874247-3202-2-git-send-email-wei.liu2@citrix.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
Hello. On 06/04/2014 01:30 PM, Wei Liu wrote: > From: "Andrew J. Bennieston" <andrew.bennieston@citrix.com> > This array was allocated separately in commit ac3d5ac2 ("xen-netback: > fix guest-receive-side array sizes") due to it being very large, and a > struct xenvif is allocated as the netdev_priv part of a struct > net_device, i.e. via kmalloc() but falling back to vmalloc() if the > initial alloc. fails. > In preparation for the multi-queue patches, where this array becomes > part of struct xenvif_queue and is always allocated through vzalloc(), > move this back into the struct xenvif. Won't this cause an allocation failure and so break bisection at this patch? > Signed-off-by: Andrew J. Bennieston <andrew.bennieston@citrix.com> > Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> WBR, Sergei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 04/06/14 15:46, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > On 06/04/2014 01:30 PM, Wei Liu wrote: > >> From: "Andrew J. Bennieston" <andrew.bennieston@citrix.com> > >> This array was allocated separately in commit ac3d5ac2 ("xen-netback: >> fix guest-receive-side array sizes") due to it being very large, and a >> struct xenvif is allocated as the netdev_priv part of a struct >> net_device, i.e. via kmalloc() but falling back to vmalloc() if the >> initial alloc. fails. > >> In preparation for the multi-queue patches, where this array becomes >> part of struct xenvif_queue and is always allocated through vzalloc(), >> move this back into the struct xenvif. > > Won't this cause an allocation failure and so break bisection at this > patch? No. As Andrew already said: "...falling back to vmalloc() if the initial alloc. fails." David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hello. On 06/04/2014 06:52 PM, David Vrabel wrote: >>> This array was allocated separately in commit ac3d5ac2 ("xen-netback: >>> fix guest-receive-side array sizes") due to it being very large, and a >>> struct xenvif is allocated as the netdev_priv part of a struct >>> net_device, i.e. via kmalloc() but falling back to vmalloc() if the >>> initial alloc. fails. >>> In preparation for the multi-queue patches, where this array becomes >>> part of struct xenvif_queue and is always allocated through vzalloc(), >>> move this back into the struct xenvif. >> Won't this cause an allocation failure and so break bisection at this >> patch? > No. As Andrew already said: "...falling back to vmalloc() if the > initial alloc. fails." Ah, sorry, I've managed to forget about that part. :-/ > David WBR, Sergei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 06:46:42PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > On 06/04/2014 01:30 PM, Wei Liu wrote: > > >From: "Andrew J. Bennieston" <andrew.bennieston@citrix.com> > > >This array was allocated separately in commit ac3d5ac2 ("xen-netback: > >fix guest-receive-side array sizes") due to it being very large, and a > >struct xenvif is allocated as the netdev_priv part of a struct > >net_device, i.e. via kmalloc() but falling back to vmalloc() if the > >initial alloc. fails. > > >In preparation for the multi-queue patches, where this array becomes > >part of struct xenvif_queue and is always allocated through vzalloc(), > >move this back into the struct xenvif. > > Won't this cause an allocation failure and so break bisection at this patch? > As stated in the commit message, this array is now allocated with vzalloc, which is no different from what it was done before (with vmalloc in ac3d5ac2). Wei. > >Signed-off-by: Andrew J. Bennieston <andrew.bennieston@citrix.com> > >Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> > > WBR, Sergei > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h b/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h index 0d4a285..2c283d6 100644 --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h @@ -158,8 +158,7 @@ struct xenvif { struct timer_list wake_queue; - /* This array is allocated seperately as it is large */ - struct gnttab_copy *grant_copy_op; + struct gnttab_copy grant_copy_op[MAX_GRANT_COPY_OPS]; /* We create one meta structure per ring request we consume, so * the maximum number is the same as the ring size. diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c b/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c index 53cdcdf..8fdedac 100644 --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c @@ -334,14 +334,6 @@ struct xenvif *xenvif_alloc(struct device *parent, domid_t domid, vif = netdev_priv(dev); - vif->grant_copy_op = vmalloc(sizeof(struct gnttab_copy) * - MAX_GRANT_COPY_OPS); - if (vif->grant_copy_op == NULL) { - pr_warn("Could not allocate grant copy space for %s\n", name); - free_netdev(dev); - return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); - } - vif->domid = domid; vif->handle = handle; vif->can_sg = 1; @@ -601,7 +593,6 @@ void xenvif_free(struct xenvif *vif) unregister_netdev(vif->dev); - vfree(vif->grant_copy_op); free_netdev(vif->dev); module_put(THIS_MODULE);