On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> Alternatively we could also change the seqfile code to fall back to
> vmalloc allocations. That would probably "fix" all single_open usages
> where large contiguous memory areas are needed and later on fail due
> to memory fragmentation.
> Does anybody like that approach (sample patch below)?
>
> ---
> fs/seq_file.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/seq_file.c b/fs/seq_file.c
> index 1d641bb108d2..fca78a04c0d1 100644
> --- a/fs/seq_file.c
> +++ b/fs/seq_file.c
> @@ -8,8 +8,10 @@
> #include <linux/fs.h>
> #include <linux/export.h>
> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> +#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/cred.h>
> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>
> #include <asm/uaccess.h>
> #include <asm/page.h>
> @@ -82,6 +84,31 @@ int seq_open(struct file *file, const struct
> seq_operations *op)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_open);
>
> +static void seq_alloc(struct seq_file *m)
> +{
> + m->size = PAGE_SIZE;
> + m->buf = kmalloc(m->size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> + if (!m->buf)
> + m->buf = vmalloc(m->size);
> +}
> +
If m->size is unconditionally PAGE_SIZE, then how is vmalloc() going to
allocate this if kmalloc() fails?
> +static void seq_free(struct seq_file *m)
> +{
> + if (unlikely(is_vmalloc_addr(m->buf)))
> + vfree(m->buf);
> + else
> + kfree(m->buf);
> +}
> +
> +static void seq_realloc(struct seq_file *m)
> +{
> + seq_free(m);
> + m->size <<= 1;
> + m->buf = kmalloc(m->size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> + if (!m->buf)
> + m->buf = vmalloc(m->size);
> +}
> +
> static int traverse(struct seq_file *m, loff_t offset)
> {
> loff_t pos = 0, index;
> @@ -96,7 +123,7 @@ static int traverse(struct seq_file *m, loff_t offset)
> return 0;
> }
> if (!m->buf) {
> - m->buf = kmalloc(m->size = PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> + seq_alloc(m);
> if (!m->buf)
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
> @@ -135,9 +162,8 @@ static int traverse(struct seq_file *m, loff_t offset)
>
> Eoverflow:
> m->op->stop(m, p);
> - kfree(m->buf);
> m->count = 0;
> - m->buf = kmalloc(m->size <<= 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> + seq_realloc(m);
> return !m->buf ? -ENOMEM : -EAGAIN;
> }
>
It seems like traverse() could be rewritten to use krealloc() which does a
memcpy() to simplify the calling code.
> @@ -192,7 +218,7 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
> size_t size, loff_t *ppos)
>
> /* grab buffer if we didn't have one */
> if (!m->buf) {
> - m->buf = kmalloc(m->size = PAGE_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> + seq_alloc(m);
> if (!m->buf)
> goto Enomem;
> }
> @@ -232,9 +258,8 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char __user *buf,
> size_t size, loff_t *ppos)
> if (m->count < m->size)
> goto Fill;
> m->op->stop(m, p);
> - kfree(m->buf);
> m->count = 0;
> - m->buf = kmalloc(m->size <<= 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> + seq_realloc(m);
> if (!m->buf)
> goto Enomem;
> m->version = 0;
> @@ -350,7 +375,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_lseek);
> int seq_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> struct seq_file *m = file->private_data;
> - kfree(m->buf);
> + seq_free(m);
> kfree(m);
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -605,8 +630,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(single_open);
> int single_open_size(struct file *file, int (*show)(struct seq_file *, void
> *),
> void *data, size_t size)
> {
> - char *buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> + char *buf;
> int ret;
> +
> + buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
> + if (!buf)
> + buf = vmalloc(size);
> if (!buf)
> return -ENOMEM;
> ret = single_open(file, show, data);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
