GFP_TEMPORARY was introduced by commit e12ba74d8ff3 ("Group short-lived
and reclaimable kernel allocations") along with __GFP_RECLAIMABLE.  It's
primary motivation was to allow users to tell that an allocation is
short lived and so the allocator can try to place such allocations close
together and prevent long term fragmentation.  As much as this sounds
like a reasonable semantic it becomes much less clear when to use the
highlevel GFP_TEMPORARY allocation flag.  How long is temporary? Can the
context holding that memory sleep? Can it take locks? It seems there is
no good answer for those questions.

The current implementation of GFP_TEMPORARY is basically GFP_KERNEL |
__GFP_RECLAIMABLE which in itself is tricky because basically none of
the existing caller provide a way to reclaim the allocated memory.  So
this is rather misleading and hard to evaluate for any benefits.

I have checked some random users and none of them has added the flag
with a specific justification.  I suspect most of them just copied from
other existing users and others just thought it might be a good idea to
use without any measuring.  This suggests that GFP_TEMPORARY just
motivates for cargo cult usage without any reasoning.

I believe that our gfp flags are quite complex already and especially
those with highlevel semantic should be clearly defined to prevent from
confusion and abuse.  Therefore I propose dropping GFP_TEMPORARY and
replace all existing users to simply use GFP_KERNEL.  Please note that
SLAB users with shrinkers will still get __GFP_RECLAIMABLE heuristic and
so they will be placed properly for memory fragmentation prevention.

I can see reasons we might want some gfp flag to reflect shorterm
allocations but I propose starting from a clear semantic definition and
only then add users with proper justification.

This was been brought up before LSF this year by Matthew [1] and it
turned out that GFP_TEMPORARY really doesn't have a clear semantic.  It
seems to be a heuristic without any measured advantage for most (if not
all) its current users.  The follow up discussion has revealed that
opinions on what might be temporary allocation differ a lot between
developers.  So rather than trying to tweak existing users into a
semantic which they haven't expected I propose to simply remove the flag
and start from scratch if we really need a semantic for short term
allocations.

[1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170118054945.GD18349@bombadil.infradead.org

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix typo]
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coding-style fixes]
[sfr@canb.auug.org.au: drm/i915: fix up]
  Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170816144703.378d4f4d@canb.auug.org.au
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170728091904.14627-1-mhocko@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

The RTAS device-tree node's refcount has been increased by one in
the function call of_find_node_by_name(), but it's missed to be
decreased by one in the error path. It leads to unbalanced refcount
on RTAS device-tree node.

This fixes above issue by decreasing RTAS device-tree node's refcount
in error path.

Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

This uses of_property_read_u32() in rtas_initialize() so that we
needn't explicitly care the CPU's endian.

Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

This removes the unnecessary nested if statements in function
rtas_initialize(), to simplify the code. No functional changes
introduced.

Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

This was entirely automated, using the script by Al:

  PATT='^[[:blank:]]*#[[:blank:]]*include[[:blank:]]*<asm/uaccess.h>'
  sed -i -e "s!$PATT!#include <linux/uaccess.h>!" \
        $(git grep -l "$PATT"|grep -v ^include/linux/uaccess.h)

to do the replacement at the end of the merge window.

Requested-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

powernv marks it's halt and restart calls as __noreturn. However,
ppc_md does not have this annotation. Add the annotation to ppc_md,
and then to every halt/restart function that is missing it.

Additionally, I have verified that all of these functions do not
return. Occasionally I have added a spin loop to be sure.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

The test is unnecessary, the FW_FEATURE_LPAR is sufficient as there
exist no other LPAR type that has RTAS.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

If ppc_rtas() is called with args.nargs == 16 and args.nret == 0,
args.rets is set to point to &args.args[16], which is beyond the end of
the args.args array. This results in a minor read overrun of the array
when we check the first return code (which, per PAPR, is a required
output of all RTAS calls) to see if there's been a hardware error.

Change the nargs/nret check to ensure nargs is <= 15, allowing room for
the status code. Users shouldn't be calling with nret == 0, but there's
no real harm if they do, so we don't stop them.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

There are no longer any users of enter_rtas() outside of rtas.c, so make
it "private", by moving the declaration inside rtas.c. Hopefully this
will encourage people to use one of the wrappers which takes the sharp
edges off the RTAS calling sequence.

Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>

Although call_rtas_display_status() does actually want to use the
regular RTAS locking, it doesn't want the extra logic that is in
rtas_call(), so currently it open codes the logic.

Instead we can use rtas_call_unlocked(), after taking the RTAS lock.

Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>