| Message ID | 20240903083818.3071759-6-link@vivo.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | udmbuf bug fix and some improvements | expand |
Hi Huan, > Subject: [PATCH v5 5/7] udmabuf: introduce udmabuf init and deinit helper > > After udmabuf is allocated, its resources need to be initialized, > including various array structures. The current array structure has > already been greatly expanded. > > Also, before udmabuf needs to be kfree, the occupied resources need to > be released. > > This part is repetitive and maybe overlooked. > > This patch give a helper function when init and deinit, by this, > deduce duplicate code. *reduce If possible, please try to improve the wording and grammatical correctness in the commit messages of other patches as well. > > Signed-off-by: Huan Yang <link@vivo.com> > --- > drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c > index ca2b21c5c57f..254d9ec3d9f3 100644 > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c > @@ -226,6 +226,28 @@ static int add_to_unpin_list(struct list_head > *unpin_list, > return 0; > } > > +static __always_inline int init_udmabuf(struct udmabuf *ubuf, pgoff_t > pgcnt) > +{ > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->unpin_list); > + > + ubuf->folios = kvmalloc_array(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->folios), > GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!ubuf->folios) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + ubuf->offsets = kvcalloc(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->offsets), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!ubuf->offsets) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static __always_inline void deinit_udmabuf(struct udmabuf *ubuf) > +{ > + unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); > + kvfree(ubuf->offsets); > + kvfree(ubuf->folios); > +} > + > static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf) > { > struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv; > @@ -234,9 +256,7 @@ static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf) > if (ubuf->sg) > put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL); > > - unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); > - kvfree(ubuf->offsets); > - kvfree(ubuf->folios); > + deinit_udmabuf(ubuf); > kfree(ubuf); > } > > @@ -396,33 +416,24 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice > *device, > if (!ubuf) > return -ENOMEM; > > - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->unpin_list); > pglimit = (size_limit_mb * 1024 * 1024) >> PAGE_SHIFT; > for (i = 0; i < head->count; i++) { > if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(list[i].offset)) > - goto err; > + goto err_noinit; > if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(list[i].size)) > - goto err; > + goto err_noinit; > > pgcnt += list[i].size >> PAGE_SHIFT; > if (pgcnt > pglimit) > - goto err; > + goto err_noinit; > } > > if (!pgcnt) > - goto err; > + goto err_noinit; > > - ubuf->folios = kvmalloc_array(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->folios), > GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!ubuf->folios) { > - ret = -ENOMEM; > + ret = init_udmabuf(ubuf, pgcnt); > + if (ret) > goto err; > - } > - > - ubuf->offsets = kvcalloc(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->offsets), GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!ubuf->offsets) { > - ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto err; > - } > > for (i = 0; i < head->count; i++) { > struct file *memfd = fget(list[i].memfd); > @@ -446,9 +457,8 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice > *device, > return ret; > > err: > - unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); > - kvfree(ubuf->offsets); > - kvfree(ubuf->folios); > + deinit_udmabuf(ubuf); > +err_noinit: I don't really see the need for this new label, but I guess it makes things a bit clear. Acked-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com> > kfree(ubuf); > return ret; > } > -- > 2.45.2
在 2024/9/6 16:20, Kasireddy, Vivek 写道: > Hi Huan, > >> Subject: [PATCH v5 5/7] udmabuf: introduce udmabuf init and deinit helper >> >> After udmabuf is allocated, its resources need to be initialized, >> including various array structures. The current array structure has >> already been greatly expanded. >> >> Also, before udmabuf needs to be kfree, the occupied resources need to >> be released. >> >> This part is repetitive and maybe overlooked. >> >> This patch give a helper function when init and deinit, by this, >> deduce duplicate code. > *reduce > > If possible, please try to improve the wording and grammatical correctness > in the commit messages of other patches as well. I'll fix it in next-version > >> Signed-off-by: Huan Yang <link@vivo.com> >> --- >> drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- >> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c >> index ca2b21c5c57f..254d9ec3d9f3 100644 >> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c >> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c >> @@ -226,6 +226,28 @@ static int add_to_unpin_list(struct list_head >> *unpin_list, >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static __always_inline int init_udmabuf(struct udmabuf *ubuf, pgoff_t >> pgcnt) >> +{ >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->unpin_list); >> + >> + ubuf->folios = kvmalloc_array(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->folios), >> GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!ubuf->folios) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + ubuf->offsets = kvcalloc(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->offsets), GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!ubuf->offsets) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static __always_inline void deinit_udmabuf(struct udmabuf *ubuf) >> +{ >> + unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); >> + kvfree(ubuf->offsets); >> + kvfree(ubuf->folios); >> +} >> + >> static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf) >> { >> struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv; >> @@ -234,9 +256,7 @@ static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf) >> if (ubuf->sg) >> put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL); >> >> - unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); >> - kvfree(ubuf->offsets); >> - kvfree(ubuf->folios); >> + deinit_udmabuf(ubuf); >> kfree(ubuf); >> } >> >> @@ -396,33 +416,24 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice >> *device, >> if (!ubuf) >> return -ENOMEM; >> >> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->unpin_list); >> pglimit = (size_limit_mb * 1024 * 1024) >> PAGE_SHIFT; >> for (i = 0; i < head->count; i++) { >> if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(list[i].offset)) >> - goto err; >> + goto err_noinit; >> if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(list[i].size)) >> - goto err; >> + goto err_noinit; >> >> pgcnt += list[i].size >> PAGE_SHIFT; >> if (pgcnt > pglimit) >> - goto err; >> + goto err_noinit; >> } >> >> if (!pgcnt) >> - goto err; >> + goto err_noinit; >> >> - ubuf->folios = kvmalloc_array(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->folios), >> GFP_KERNEL); >> - if (!ubuf->folios) { >> - ret = -ENOMEM; >> + ret = init_udmabuf(ubuf, pgcnt); >> + if (ret) >> goto err; >> - } >> - >> - ubuf->offsets = kvcalloc(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->offsets), GFP_KERNEL); >> - if (!ubuf->offsets) { >> - ret = -ENOMEM; >> - goto err; >> - } >> >> for (i = 0; i < head->count; i++) { >> struct file *memfd = fget(list[i].memfd); >> @@ -446,9 +457,8 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice >> *device, >> return ret; >> >> err: >> - unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); >> - kvfree(ubuf->offsets); >> - kvfree(ubuf->folios); >> + deinit_udmabuf(ubuf); >> +err_noinit: > I don't really see the need for this new label, but I guess it makes things a > bit clear. If not this, each list err will need kfree, I think use this more clear. Thank you. :) > > Acked-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com> > >> kfree(ubuf); >> return ret; >> } >> -- >> 2.45.2
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c index ca2b21c5c57f..254d9ec3d9f3 100644 --- a/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c @@ -226,6 +226,28 @@ static int add_to_unpin_list(struct list_head *unpin_list, return 0; } +static __always_inline int init_udmabuf(struct udmabuf *ubuf, pgoff_t pgcnt) +{ + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->unpin_list); + + ubuf->folios = kvmalloc_array(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->folios), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!ubuf->folios) + return -ENOMEM; + + ubuf->offsets = kvcalloc(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->offsets), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!ubuf->offsets) + return -ENOMEM; + + return 0; +} + +static __always_inline void deinit_udmabuf(struct udmabuf *ubuf) +{ + unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); + kvfree(ubuf->offsets); + kvfree(ubuf->folios); +} + static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf) { struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv; @@ -234,9 +256,7 @@ static void release_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf) if (ubuf->sg) put_sg_table(dev, ubuf->sg, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL); - unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); - kvfree(ubuf->offsets); - kvfree(ubuf->folios); + deinit_udmabuf(ubuf); kfree(ubuf); } @@ -396,33 +416,24 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice *device, if (!ubuf) return -ENOMEM; - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&ubuf->unpin_list); pglimit = (size_limit_mb * 1024 * 1024) >> PAGE_SHIFT; for (i = 0; i < head->count; i++) { if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(list[i].offset)) - goto err; + goto err_noinit; if (!PAGE_ALIGNED(list[i].size)) - goto err; + goto err_noinit; pgcnt += list[i].size >> PAGE_SHIFT; if (pgcnt > pglimit) - goto err; + goto err_noinit; } if (!pgcnt) - goto err; + goto err_noinit; - ubuf->folios = kvmalloc_array(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->folios), GFP_KERNEL); - if (!ubuf->folios) { - ret = -ENOMEM; + ret = init_udmabuf(ubuf, pgcnt); + if (ret) goto err; - } - - ubuf->offsets = kvcalloc(pgcnt, sizeof(*ubuf->offsets), GFP_KERNEL); - if (!ubuf->offsets) { - ret = -ENOMEM; - goto err; - } for (i = 0; i < head->count; i++) { struct file *memfd = fget(list[i].memfd); @@ -446,9 +457,8 @@ static long udmabuf_create(struct miscdevice *device, return ret; err: - unpin_all_folios(&ubuf->unpin_list); - kvfree(ubuf->offsets); - kvfree(ubuf->folios); + deinit_udmabuf(ubuf); +err_noinit: kfree(ubuf); return ret; }
After udmabuf is allocated, its resources need to be initialized, including various array structures. The current array structure has already been greatly expanded. Also, before udmabuf needs to be kfree, the occupied resources need to be released. This part is repetitive and maybe overlooked. This patch give a helper function when init and deinit, by this, deduce duplicate code. Signed-off-by: Huan Yang <link@vivo.com> --- drivers/dma-buf/udmabuf.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)