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

[Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>]

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@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/