Re: [PATCH 2/6] BC: beancounters core (API)

From: Alexey Dobriyan
Date: Wed Aug 23 2006 - 09:28:32 EST


On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 03:03:07PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:

> --- /dev/null
> +++ ./include/bc/beancounter.h

> +#define BC_RESOURCES 0

Do you want userspace to see it?

> +struct bc_resource_parm {
> + unsigned long barrier; /* A barrier over which resource allocations
> + * are failed gracefully. e.g. if the amount
> + * of consumed memory is over the barrier
> + * further sbrk() or mmap() calls fail, the
> + * existing processes are not killed.
> + */
> + unsigned long limit; /* hard resource limit */
> + unsigned long held; /* consumed resources */
> + unsigned long maxheld; /* maximum amount of consumed resources */
> + unsigned long minheld; /* minumum amount of consumed resources */

Stupid question: when minimum amount is useful?

> +/*
> + * Kernel internal part.
> + */

Redundant comment, YMMV.

> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +
> +#include <linux/config.h>

config.h is unneeded. You can drop it from everywhere.

> +struct beancounter
> +{

nit:
"struct beancounter {"

> + atomic_t bc_refcount;
> + spinlock_t bc_lock;
> + uid_t bc_id;
> + struct hlist_node hash;
> +
> + /* resources statistics and settings */
> + struct bc_resource_parm bc_parms[BC_RESOURCES];
> +};
> +
> +enum severity { BC_BARRIER, BC_LIMIT, BC_FORCE };

bc_severity?

> --- /dev/null 2006-07-18 14:52:43.075228448 +0400
> +++ ./kernel/bc/beancounter.c 2006-08-21 13:13:11.000000000 +0400

> +#define bc_hash_fun(x) ((((x) >> 8) ^ (x)) & (BC_HASH_SIZE - 1))
> +
> +struct hlist_head bc_hash[BC_HASH_SIZE];
> +spinlock_t bc_hash_lock;
> +
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bc_hash);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bc_hash_lock);

tasklist_lock was unexported recently and this looks equally low-level.
I couldn't find place in patchbomb where you use it in modular fashion.
perhaps, i need more sleep.

> +void __put_beancounter(struct beancounter *bc)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + /* equivalent to atomic_dec_and_lock_irqsave() */
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + if (likely(!atomic_dec_and_lock(&bc->bc_refcount, &bc_hash_lock))) {
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> + if (unlikely(atomic_read(&bc->bc_refcount) < 0))
> + printk(KERN_ERR "BC: Bad refcount: bc=%p, "
> + "luid=%d, ref=%d\n",
> + bc, bc->bc_id,
> + atomic_read(&bc->bc_refcount));

Should this BUG_ON() ?

> + return;
> + }
> +
> + BUG_ON(bc == &init_bc);
> + verify_held(bc);
> + hlist_del(&bc->hash);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bc_hash_lock, flags);
> + kmem_cache_free(bc_cachep, bc);
> +}
> +
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__put_beancounter);

> +int bc_charge_locked(struct beancounter *bc, int resource, unsigned long
> val,
> + enum severity strict)
> +{
> + /*
> + * bc_value <= BC_MAXVALUE, value <= BC_MAXVALUE, and only one
> addition
> + * at the moment is possible so an overflow is impossible.
> + */
> + bc->bc_parms[resource].held += val;
> +
> + switch (strict) {
> + case BC_BARRIER:

nit: one tab less

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/