qemu_memalign() aborts if OOM. Drop some dead code.
Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
---
hw/ppc/spapr.c | 6 ------
hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 8 ++------
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
index 0cc19b5863a4..f098d0ee6d98 100644
--- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
+++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
@@ -1521,12 +1521,6 @@ void spapr_reallocate_hpt(SpaprMachineState *spapr, int shift,
int i;
spapr->htab = qemu_memalign(size, size);
- if (!spapr->htab) {
- error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
- "Could not allocate HPT of order %d", shift);
- return;
- }
-
memset(spapr->htab, 0, size);
spapr->htab_shift = shift;
diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
index 607740150fa2..34e146f628fb 100644
--- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
+++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
@@ -361,12 +361,8 @@ static void *hpt_prepare_thread(void *opaque)
size_t size = 1ULL << pending->shift;
pending->hpt = qemu_memalign(size, size);
- if (pending->hpt) {
- memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
- pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
- } else {
- pending->ret = H_NO_MEM;
- }
+ memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
+ pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
qemu_mutex_lock_iothread();
On 10/26/20 1:40 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> qemu_memalign() aborts if OOM. Drop some dead code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> ---
> hw/ppc/spapr.c | 6 ------
> hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 8 ++------
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> index 0cc19b5863a4..f098d0ee6d98 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> @@ -1521,12 +1521,6 @@ void spapr_reallocate_hpt(SpaprMachineState *spapr, int shift,
> int i;
>
> spapr->htab = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> - if (!spapr->htab) {
> - error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
> - "Could not allocate HPT of order %d", shift);
> - return;
Wasn't the idea to use qemu_try_memalign() here?
> - }
> -
> memset(spapr->htab, 0, size);
> spapr->htab_shift = shift;
>
> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> index 607740150fa2..34e146f628fb 100644
> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> @@ -361,12 +361,8 @@ static void *hpt_prepare_thread(void *opaque)
> size_t size = 1ULL << pending->shift;
>
> pending->hpt = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> - if (pending->hpt) {
> - memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
> - pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
> - } else {
> - pending->ret = H_NO_MEM;
Ditto.
> - }
> + memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
> + pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
>
> qemu_mutex_lock_iothread();
>
On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:43:08 +0100
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 10/26/20 1:40 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > qemu_memalign() aborts if OOM. Drop some dead code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> > ---
> > hw/ppc/spapr.c | 6 ------
> > hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 8 ++------
> > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > index 0cc19b5863a4..f098d0ee6d98 100644
> > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > @@ -1521,12 +1521,6 @@ void spapr_reallocate_hpt(SpaprMachineState *spapr, int shift,
> > int i;
> >
> > spapr->htab = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> > - if (!spapr->htab) {
> > - error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
> > - "Could not allocate HPT of order %d", shift);
> > - return;
>
> Wasn't the idea to use qemu_try_memalign() here?
>
Well... I have mixed feeling around this. The HTAB was first
introduced by commit:
commit f43e35255cffb6ac6230dd09d308f7909f823f96
Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Date: Fri Apr 1 15:15:22 2011 +1100
Virtual hash page table handling on pSeries machine
using qemu_mallocz(), which was aborting on OOM. It then got
replaced by g_malloc0() when qemu_mallocz() got deprecated
and eventually by qemu_memalign() when KVM support was added.
Surviving OOM when allocating the HTAB never seemed to be an
option until this commit that introduced the check:
commit c5f54f3e31bf693f70a98d4d73ea5dbe05689857
Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Date: Tue Feb 9 10:21:56 2016 +1000
pseries: Move hash page table allocation to reset time
I don't really see in the patch and in the changelog an obvious
desire to try to handle OOM.
> > - }
> > -
> > memset(spapr->htab, 0, size);
> > spapr->htab_shift = shift;
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > index 607740150fa2..34e146f628fb 100644
> > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > @@ -361,12 +361,8 @@ static void *hpt_prepare_thread(void *opaque)
> > size_t size = 1ULL << pending->shift;
> >
> > pending->hpt = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> > - if (pending->hpt) {
> > - memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
> > - pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
> > - } else {
> > - pending->ret = H_NO_MEM;
>
> Ditto.
>
This one was introduced by commit:
commit 0b0b831016ae93bc14698a5d7202eb77feafea75
Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Date: Fri May 12 15:46:49 2017 +1000
pseries: Implement HPT resizing
I agree that maybe the intent here could have been to use qemu_try_memalign(),
but again I don't quite see any strong justification to handle OOM in the
changelog.
David,
Any insight to share ?
> > - }
> > + memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
> > + pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
> >
> > qemu_mutex_lock_iothread();
> >
>
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:46:47PM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:43:08 +0100
> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10/26/20 1:40 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > qemu_memalign() aborts if OOM. Drop some dead code.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> > > ---
> > > hw/ppc/spapr.c | 6 ------
> > > hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 8 ++------
> > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > > index 0cc19b5863a4..f098d0ee6d98 100644
> > > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > > @@ -1521,12 +1521,6 @@ void spapr_reallocate_hpt(SpaprMachineState *spapr, int shift,
> > > int i;
> > >
> > > spapr->htab = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> > > - if (!spapr->htab) {
> > > - error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
> > > - "Could not allocate HPT of order %d", shift);
> > > - return;
> >
> > Wasn't the idea to use qemu_try_memalign() here?
> >
>
> Well... I have mixed feeling around this. The HTAB was first
> introduced by commit:
>
> commit f43e35255cffb6ac6230dd09d308f7909f823f96
> Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> Date: Fri Apr 1 15:15:22 2011 +1100
>
> Virtual hash page table handling on pSeries machine
>
> using qemu_mallocz(), which was aborting on OOM. It then got
> replaced by g_malloc0() when qemu_mallocz() got deprecated
> and eventually by qemu_memalign() when KVM support was added.
>
> Surviving OOM when allocating the HTAB never seemed to be an
> option until this commit that introduced the check:
>
> commit c5f54f3e31bf693f70a98d4d73ea5dbe05689857
> Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> Date: Tue Feb 9 10:21:56 2016 +1000
>
> pseries: Move hash page table allocation to reset time
>
> I don't really see in the patch and in the changelog an obvious
> desire to try to handle OOM.
This one is probably ok. AFAICT all failures returned here would be
more or less fatal in the caller, one way or another (&error_fatal in
two cases, and failure to load an incoming migration stream in the
other).
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > memset(spapr->htab, 0, size);
> > > spapr->htab_shift = shift;
> > >
> > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > > index 607740150fa2..34e146f628fb 100644
> > > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > > @@ -361,12 +361,8 @@ static void *hpt_prepare_thread(void *opaque)
> > > size_t size = 1ULL << pending->shift;
> > >
> > > pending->hpt = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> > > - if (pending->hpt) {
> > > - memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
> > > - pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
> > > - } else {
> > > - pending->ret = H_NO_MEM;
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
>
> This one was introduced by commit:
>
> commit 0b0b831016ae93bc14698a5d7202eb77feafea75
> Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> Date: Fri May 12 15:46:49 2017 +1000
>
> pseries: Implement HPT resizing
>
> I agree that maybe the intent here could have been to use qemu_try_memalign(),
> but again I don't quite see any strong justification to handle OOM in the
> changelog.
>
> David,
>
> Any insight to share ?
Aborting on an HPT resize failure is definitely not ok, though. This
one needs to be a qemu_try_memalign().
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 12:56:40 +1100
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 03:46:47PM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:43:08 +0100
> > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 10/26/20 1:40 PM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > > qemu_memalign() aborts if OOM. Drop some dead code.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> > > > ---
> > > > hw/ppc/spapr.c | 6 ------
> > > > hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c | 8 ++------
> > > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > > > index 0cc19b5863a4..f098d0ee6d98 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
> > > > @@ -1521,12 +1521,6 @@ void spapr_reallocate_hpt(SpaprMachineState *spapr, int shift,
> > > > int i;
> > > >
> > > > spapr->htab = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> > > > - if (!spapr->htab) {
> > > > - error_setg_errno(errp, errno,
> > > > - "Could not allocate HPT of order %d", shift);
> > > > - return;
> > >
> > > Wasn't the idea to use qemu_try_memalign() here?
> > >
> >
> > Well... I have mixed feeling around this. The HTAB was first
> > introduced by commit:
> >
> > commit f43e35255cffb6ac6230dd09d308f7909f823f96
> > Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > Date: Fri Apr 1 15:15:22 2011 +1100
> >
> > Virtual hash page table handling on pSeries machine
> >
> > using qemu_mallocz(), which was aborting on OOM. It then got
> > replaced by g_malloc0() when qemu_mallocz() got deprecated
> > and eventually by qemu_memalign() when KVM support was added.
> >
> > Surviving OOM when allocating the HTAB never seemed to be an
> > option until this commit that introduced the check:
> >
> > commit c5f54f3e31bf693f70a98d4d73ea5dbe05689857
> > Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > Date: Tue Feb 9 10:21:56 2016 +1000
> >
> > pseries: Move hash page table allocation to reset time
> >
> > I don't really see in the patch and in the changelog an obvious
> > desire to try to handle OOM.
>
>
> This one is probably ok. AFAICT all failures returned here would be
> more or less fatal in the caller, one way or another (&error_fatal in
> two cases, and failure to load an incoming migration stream in the
> other).
>
> > > > - }
> > > > -
> > > > memset(spapr->htab, 0, size);
> > > > spapr->htab_shift = shift;
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > > > index 607740150fa2..34e146f628fb 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_hcall.c
> > > > @@ -361,12 +361,8 @@ static void *hpt_prepare_thread(void *opaque)
> > > > size_t size = 1ULL << pending->shift;
> > > >
> > > > pending->hpt = qemu_memalign(size, size);
> > > > - if (pending->hpt) {
> > > > - memset(pending->hpt, 0, size);
> > > > - pending->ret = H_SUCCESS;
> > > > - } else {
> > > > - pending->ret = H_NO_MEM;
> > >
> > > Ditto.
> > >
> >
> > This one was introduced by commit:
> >
> > commit 0b0b831016ae93bc14698a5d7202eb77feafea75
> > Author: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > Date: Fri May 12 15:46:49 2017 +1000
> >
> > pseries: Implement HPT resizing
> >
> > I agree that maybe the intent here could have been to use qemu_try_memalign(),
> > but again I don't quite see any strong justification to handle OOM in the
> > changelog.
> >
> > David,
> >
> > Any insight to share ?
>
> Aborting on an HPT resize failure is definitely not ok, though. This
> one needs to be a qemu_try_memalign().
>
Ok, I'll fix that.
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.