OpenE2K
/
linux
6
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity
linux/include/linux/flex_array.h

82 lines
2.4 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
#ifndef _FLEX_ARRAY_H
#define _FLEX_ARRAY_H
#include <linux/types.h>
reciprocal_divide: update/correction of the algorithm Jakub Zawadzki noticed that some divisions by reciprocal_divide() were not correct [1][2], which he could also show with BPF code after divisions are transformed into reciprocal_value() for runtime invariance which can be passed to reciprocal_divide() later on; reverse in BPF dump ended up with a different, off-by-one K in some situations. This has been fixed by Eric Dumazet in commit aee636c4809fa5 ("bpf: do not use reciprocal divide"). This follow-up patch improves reciprocal_value() and reciprocal_divide() to work in all cases by using Granlund and Montgomery method, so that also future use is safe and without any non-obvious side-effects. Known problems with the old implementation were that division by 1 always returned 0 and some off-by-ones when the dividend and divisor where very large. This seemed to not be problematic with its current users, as far as we can tell. Eric Dumazet checked for the slab usage, we cannot surely say so in the case of flex_array. Still, in order to fix that, we propose an extension from the original implementation from commit 6a2d7a955d8d resp. [3][4], by using the algorithm proposed in "Division by Invariant Integers Using Multiplication" [5], Torbjörn Granlund and Peter L. Montgomery, that is, pseudocode for q = n/d where q, n, d is in u32 universe: 1) Initialization: int l = ceil(log_2 d) uword m' = floor((1<<32)*((1<<l)-d)/d)+1 int sh_1 = min(l,1) int sh_2 = max(l-1,0) 2) For q = n/d, all uword: uword t = (n*m')>>32 q = (t+((n-t)>>sh_1))>>sh_2 The assembler implementation from Agner Fog [6] also helped a lot while implementing. We have tested the implementation on x86_64, ppc64, i686, s390x; on x86_64/haswell we're still half the latency compared to normal divide. Joint work with Daniel Borkmann. [1] http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/reciprocal-buggy.c [2] http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/set-and-dump-filter-k-bug.c [3] https://gmplib.org/~tege/division-paper.pdf [4] http://homepage.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/bcd/divide.html [5] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.1.2556 [6] http://www.agner.org/optimize/asmlib.zip Reported-by: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@darkjames.pl> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> Cc: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Jesse Gross <jesse@nicira.com> Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net> Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com> Cc: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> Cc: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@darkjames.pl> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-01-22 02:29:41 +01:00
#include <linux/reciprocal_div.h>
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
#include <asm/page.h>
#define FLEX_ARRAY_PART_SIZE PAGE_SIZE
#define FLEX_ARRAY_BASE_SIZE PAGE_SIZE
struct flex_array_part;
/*
* This is meant to replace cases where an array-like
* structure has gotten too big to fit into kmalloc()
* and the developer is getting tempted to use
* vmalloc().
*/
struct flex_array {
union {
struct {
int element_size;
int total_nr_elements;
flex_array: avoid divisions when accessing elements On most architectures division is an expensive operation and accessing an element currently requires four of them. This performance penalty effectively precludes flex arrays from being used on any kind of fast path. However, two of these divisions can be handled at creation time and the others can be replaced by a reciprocal divide, completely avoiding real divisions on access. [eparis@redhat.com: rebase on top of changes to support 0 len elements] [eparis@redhat.com: initialize part_nr when array fits entirely in base] Signed-off-by: Jesse Gross <jesse@nicira.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-05-27 01:25:02 +02:00
int elems_per_part;
reciprocal_divide: update/correction of the algorithm Jakub Zawadzki noticed that some divisions by reciprocal_divide() were not correct [1][2], which he could also show with BPF code after divisions are transformed into reciprocal_value() for runtime invariance which can be passed to reciprocal_divide() later on; reverse in BPF dump ended up with a different, off-by-one K in some situations. This has been fixed by Eric Dumazet in commit aee636c4809fa5 ("bpf: do not use reciprocal divide"). This follow-up patch improves reciprocal_value() and reciprocal_divide() to work in all cases by using Granlund and Montgomery method, so that also future use is safe and without any non-obvious side-effects. Known problems with the old implementation were that division by 1 always returned 0 and some off-by-ones when the dividend and divisor where very large. This seemed to not be problematic with its current users, as far as we can tell. Eric Dumazet checked for the slab usage, we cannot surely say so in the case of flex_array. Still, in order to fix that, we propose an extension from the original implementation from commit 6a2d7a955d8d resp. [3][4], by using the algorithm proposed in "Division by Invariant Integers Using Multiplication" [5], Torbjörn Granlund and Peter L. Montgomery, that is, pseudocode for q = n/d where q, n, d is in u32 universe: 1) Initialization: int l = ceil(log_2 d) uword m' = floor((1<<32)*((1<<l)-d)/d)+1 int sh_1 = min(l,1) int sh_2 = max(l-1,0) 2) For q = n/d, all uword: uword t = (n*m')>>32 q = (t+((n-t)>>sh_1))>>sh_2 The assembler implementation from Agner Fog [6] also helped a lot while implementing. We have tested the implementation on x86_64, ppc64, i686, s390x; on x86_64/haswell we're still half the latency compared to normal divide. Joint work with Daniel Borkmann. [1] http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/reciprocal-buggy.c [2] http://www.wireshark.org/~darkjames/set-and-dump-filter-k-bug.c [3] https://gmplib.org/~tege/division-paper.pdf [4] http://homepage.cs.uiowa.edu/~jones/bcd/divide.html [5] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.1.2556 [6] http://www.agner.org/optimize/asmlib.zip Reported-by: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@darkjames.pl> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> Cc: Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Jesse Gross <jesse@nicira.com> Cc: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com> Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> Cc: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Andy Gospodarek <andy@greyhouse.net> Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com> Cc: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com> Cc: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@darkjames.pl> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-01-22 02:29:41 +01:00
struct reciprocal_value reciprocal_elems;
flex_array: declare parts member to have incomplete type The `parts' member of struct flex_array should evaluate to an incomplete type so that sizeof() cannot be used and C99 does not require the zero-length specification. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-08-26 23:29:21 +02:00
struct flex_array_part *parts[];
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
};
/*
* This little trick makes sure that
* sizeof(flex_array) == PAGE_SIZE
*/
char padding[FLEX_ARRAY_BASE_SIZE];
};
};
flex_array: introduce DEFINE_FLEX_ARRAY FLEX_ARRAY_INIT(element_size, total_nr_elements) cannot determine if either parameter is valid, so flex arrays which are statically allocated with this interface can easily become corrupted or reference beyond its allocated memory. This removes FLEX_ARRAY_INIT() as a struct flex_array initializer since no initializer may perform the required checking. Instead, the array is now defined with a new interface: DEFINE_FLEX_ARRAY(name, element_size, total_nr_elements) This may be prefixed with `static' for file scope. This interface includes compile-time checking of the parameters to ensure they are valid. Since the validity of both element_size and total_nr_elements depend on FLEX_ARRAY_BASE_SIZE and FLEX_ARRAY_PART_SIZE, the kernel build will fail if either of these predefined values changes such that the array parameters are no longer valid. Since BUILD_BUG_ON() requires compile time constants, several of the static inline functions that were once local to lib/flex_array.c had to be moved to include/linux/flex_array.h. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-09-22 02:04:33 +02:00
/* Number of bytes left in base struct flex_array, excluding metadata */
#define FLEX_ARRAY_BASE_BYTES_LEFT \
(FLEX_ARRAY_BASE_SIZE - offsetof(struct flex_array, parts))
/* Number of pointers in base to struct flex_array_part pages */
#define FLEX_ARRAY_NR_BASE_PTRS \
(FLEX_ARRAY_BASE_BYTES_LEFT / sizeof(struct flex_array_part *))
/* Number of elements of size that fit in struct flex_array_part */
#define FLEX_ARRAY_ELEMENTS_PER_PART(size) \
(FLEX_ARRAY_PART_SIZE / size)
/*
* Defines a statically allocated flex array and ensures its parameters are
* valid.
*/
#define DEFINE_FLEX_ARRAY(__arrayname, __element_size, __total) \
struct flex_array __arrayname = { { { \
.element_size = (__element_size), \
.total_nr_elements = (__total), \
} } }; \
static inline void __arrayname##_invalid_parameter(void) \
{ \
BUILD_BUG_ON((__total) > FLEX_ARRAY_NR_BASE_PTRS * \
FLEX_ARRAY_ELEMENTS_PER_PART(__element_size)); \
}
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
flex_array: convert element_nr formals to unsigned It's problematic to allow signed element_nr's or total's to be passed as part of the flex array API. flex_array_alloc() allows total_nr_elements to be set to a negative quantity, which is obviously erroneous. flex_array_get() and flex_array_put() allows negative array indices in dereferencing an array part, which could address memory mapped before struct flex_array. The fix is to convert all existing element_nr formals to be qualified as unsigned. Existing checks to compare it to total_nr_elements or the max array size based on element_size need not be changed. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-08-26 23:29:22 +02:00
struct flex_array *flex_array_alloc(int element_size, unsigned int total,
gfp_t flags);
int flex_array_prealloc(struct flex_array *fa, unsigned int start,
flex_array: flex_array_prealloc takes a number of elements, not an end Change flex_array_prealloc to take the number of elements for which space should be allocated instead of the last (inclusive) element. Users and documentation are updated accordingly. flex_arrays got introduced before they had users. When folks started using it, they ended up needing a different API than was coded up originally. This swaps over to the API that folks apparently need. Based-on-patch-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> Tested-by: Chris Richards <gizmo@giz-works.com> Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: stable@kernel.org [2.6.38+]
2011-04-28 21:55:52 +02:00
unsigned int nr_elements, gfp_t flags);
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
void flex_array_free(struct flex_array *fa);
void flex_array_free_parts(struct flex_array *fa);
flex_array: convert element_nr formals to unsigned It's problematic to allow signed element_nr's or total's to be passed as part of the flex array API. flex_array_alloc() allows total_nr_elements to be set to a negative quantity, which is obviously erroneous. flex_array_get() and flex_array_put() allows negative array indices in dereferencing an array part, which could address memory mapped before struct flex_array. The fix is to convert all existing element_nr formals to be qualified as unsigned. Existing checks to compare it to total_nr_elements or the max array size based on element_size need not be changed. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-08-26 23:29:22 +02:00
int flex_array_put(struct flex_array *fa, unsigned int element_nr, void *src,
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
gfp_t flags);
flex_array: add flex_array_clear function Add a new function to the flex_array API: int flex_array_clear(struct flex_array *fa, unsigned int element_nr) This function will zero the element at element_nr in the flex_array. Although this is equivalent to using flex_array_put() and passing a pointer to zero'd memory, flex_array_clear() does not require such a pointer to memory that would most likely need to be allocated on the caller's stack which could be significantly large depending on element_size. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-09-22 02:04:30 +02:00
int flex_array_clear(struct flex_array *fa, unsigned int element_nr);
flex_array: convert element_nr formals to unsigned It's problematic to allow signed element_nr's or total's to be passed as part of the flex array API. flex_array_alloc() allows total_nr_elements to be set to a negative quantity, which is obviously erroneous. flex_array_get() and flex_array_put() allows negative array indices in dereferencing an array part, which could address memory mapped before struct flex_array. The fix is to convert all existing element_nr formals to be qualified as unsigned. Existing checks to compare it to total_nr_elements or the max array size based on element_size need not be changed. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-08-26 23:29:22 +02:00
void *flex_array_get(struct flex_array *fa, unsigned int element_nr);
flex_array: add flex_array_shrink function Add a new function to the flex_array API: int flex_array_shrink(struct flex_array *fa) This function will free all unused second-level pages. Since elements are now poisoned if they are not allocated with __GFP_ZERO, it's possible to identify parts that consist solely of unused elements. flex_array_shrink() returns the number of pages freed. Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-09-22 02:04:31 +02:00
int flex_array_shrink(struct flex_array *fa);
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
flex_array: add helpers to get and put to make pointers easy to use Getting and putting arrays of pointers with flex arrays is a PITA. You have to remember to pass &ptr to the _put and you have to do weird and wacky casting to get the ptr back from the _get. Add two functions flex_array_get_ptr() and flex_array_put_ptr() to handle all of the magic. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: simplification suggested by Joe] Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2010-08-10 02:20:56 +02:00
#define flex_array_put_ptr(fa, nr, src, gfp) \
flex_array: fix flex_array_put_ptr macro to be valid C Using flex_array_put_ptr() results in a compile error "error: lvalue required as unary ‘&’ operand" fix the casting order to fix this. Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>
2010-11-29 21:47:09 +01:00
flex_array_put(fa, nr, (void *)&(src), gfp)
flex_array: add helpers to get and put to make pointers easy to use Getting and putting arrays of pointers with flex arrays is a PITA. You have to remember to pass &ptr to the _put and you have to do weird and wacky casting to get the ptr back from the _get. Add two functions flex_array_get_ptr() and flex_array_put_ptr() to handle all of the magic. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: simplification suggested by Joe] Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2010-08-10 02:20:56 +02:00
void *flex_array_get_ptr(struct flex_array *fa, unsigned int element_nr);
lib: flexible array implementation Once a structure goes over PAGE_SIZE*2, we see occasional allocation failures. Some people have chosen to switch over to things like vmalloc() that will let them keep array-like access to such a large structures. But, vmalloc() has plenty of downsides. Here's an alternative. I think it's what Andrew was suggesting here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/2/518 I call it a flexible array. It does all of its work in PAGE_SIZE bits, so never does an order>0 allocation. The base level has PAGE_SIZE-2*sizeof(int) bytes of storage for pointers to the second level. So, with a 32-bit arch, you get about 4MB (4183112 bytes) of total storage when the objects pack nicely into a page. It is half that on 64-bit because the pointers are twice the size. There's a table detailing this in the code. There are kerneldocs for the functions, but here's an overview: flex_array_alloc() - dynamically allocate a base structure flex_array_free() - free the array and all of the second-level pages flex_array_free_parts() - free the second-level pages, but not the base (for static bases) flex_array_put() - copy into the array at the given index flex_array_get() - copy out of the array at the given index flex_array_prealloc() - preallocate the second-level pages between the given indexes to guarantee no allocs will occur at put() time. We could also potentially just pass the "element_size" into each of the API functions instead of storing it internally. That would get us one more base pointer on 32-bit. I've been testing this by running it in userspace. The header and patch that I've been using are here, as well as the little script I'm using to generate the size table which goes in the kerneldocs. http://sr71.net/~dave/linux/flexarray/ [akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes] Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reviewed-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2009-07-30 00:04:18 +02:00
#endif /* _FLEX_ARRAY_H */