On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:44 AM, Robert P. J. Day
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> inspired by rene's latest postings, i went back to review my memory
> management and i'm confused by a comment i found in one of the MM
> header files.
>
> it's well-known that *all* of the physical memory on a system is
> represented by an array of "struct page" structures, which i can
> condense to:
>
> struct page {
> ...
> void *virtual;
> ...
> }
>
> so, as i read it, if a physical page is currently mapped into the
> kernel address space, that member will contain its virtual address.
> OTOH, if it *isn't* mapped, that pointer will contain NULL. so far,
> so good?
>
> also, memory allocation in the "normal" zone of the 32-bit x86
> address space should always return contiguous physical memory, but
> allocation from the "highmem" zone promises to return only *virtually*
> contiguous memory. again, all of that's fairly straightforward. but
> here's where the glitch shows up, in this comment from
> include/linux/gfp.h:
>
> /*
> * There is only one page-allocator function, and two main namespaces to
> * it. The alloc_page*() variants return 'struct page *' and as such
> * can allocate highmem pages, the *get*page*() variants return
> * virtual kernel addresses to the allocated page(s).
> */
>
The above comment is represented in the function below (two
namespaces, and how get*page boils down to alloc_pages():
unsigned long __get_free_pages(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order)
{
struct page * page;
page = alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order);
if (!page)
return 0;
return (unsigned long) page_address(page);
}
And as for highmem or no highmem, that is because alloc_pages() allows
a gfp_mask to be passed in. If it is not there, then naturally no
way to control it.
But looking at vmalloc() it seemed it always used highmem anyway:
/**
* vmalloc - allocate virtually contiguous memory
* @size: allocation size
* Allocate enough pages to cover @size from the page level
* allocator and map them into contiguous kernel virtual space.
*
* For tight control over page level allocator and protection flags
* use __vmalloc() instead.
*/
void *vmalloc(unsigned long size)
{
return __vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM, PAGE_KERNEL);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(vmalloc);
So there goes the big diff - i think - page_alloc() allow more
flexible control, whereas vmalloc() is always highmem, on top struct
page vs virtual address namespace difference.
> now, if i allocate a chunk of space from the normal zone and i get
> back a valid address after the allocation succeeds, it seems to me
> that i can represent that space with either the returned virtual
> address *or* the address of the "page" structure, right? and that's
> because, as long as the space allocated is physically contiguous, then
> a single "struct page *" value will represent the first struct and the
> rest of the consecutive ones after that that define that space.
>
> however, if i allocate space from high memory (896M and up using,
> say, vmalloc()), what i'll get back if that call succeeds is the
> resulting virtual address ***but*** , since there's no guarantee that
> those pages are contiguous, each page could be represented by some
continguity ....not sure...but what I can see is tha vmalloc end up
calling kmalloc(), which ends up callling alloc_pages().
> arbitrary "page" structure, no?
>
> so how to explain this part of the comment from above?
>
> "The alloc_page*() variants return 'struct page *' and as such can
> allocate highmem pages, ..."
>
> huh? if you're allocating "highmem" pages, i don't see how you can
> represent the allocated space with a single struct page pointer
> (unless, of course, it's a single page, but that's not what's being
> addressed here).
>
> so what does that comment mean? it seems to be exactly backwards
> from what i'm used to believing.
>
Essentially, vmalloc try to conserve precious lowmem, and so for some
reason lowmem is needed, alloc_pages should be used. That what I
think :-). Correct me if I am wrong. Or did I completely
misunderstood u?
--
Regards,
Peter Teoh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
