On 11/7/18 12:15 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 14:20:53 +0200 Alexey Skidanov
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On success, gen_pool_first_fit_align() returns the bit number such that
>> chunk_start_addr + (bit << order) is properly aligned. On failure,
>> the bitmap size parameter is returned.
>>
>> When the chunk_start_addr isn't aligned properly, the
>> chunk_start_addr + (bit << order) isn't aligned too.
>>
>> To fix this, gen_pool_first_fit_align() takes into account
>> the chunk_start_addr alignment and returns the bit value such that
>> chunk_start_addr + (bit << order) is properly aligned
>> (exactly as it done in CMA).
>>
>> ...
>>
>> --- a/include/linux/genalloc.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/genalloc.h
>>
>> ...
>>
>> + struct gen_pool *pool, unsigned long start_add)
>>
>> ...
>>
>> + struct gen_pool *pool, unsigned long start_add)
>>
>> ...
>>
>> + struct gen_pool *pool, unsigned long start_add)
>>
>> ...
>>
>
> We have three typos here. Which makes me wonder why we're passing the
> new argument and then not using it?
>
genpool uses allocation callbacks function that implement some
allocation strategy - bes fit, first fit, ... All of them has the same
type. The added chunk start_addr is used only in one of them -
gen_pool_first_fit_align()
Thanks,
Alexey
