linux-kernel - Re: [Part1 PATCH v5 03/22] x86, ACPI, mm: Kill max_low_pfn

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:04:22 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, trenn@...e.de, yinghai@...nel.org,
	jiang.liu@...wei.com, wency@...fujitsu.com, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com, mgorman@...e.de,
	minchan@...nel.org, mina86@...a86.com, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	vasilis.liaskovitis@...fitbricks.com, lwoodman@...hat.com,
	riel@...hat.com, jweiner@...hat.com, prarit@...hat.com,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Part1 PATCH v5 03/22] x86, ACPI, mm: Kill max_low_pfn_mapped

Hello,

On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 09:02:50PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
> 
> Now we have pfn_mapped[] array, and max_low_pfn_mapped should not
> be used anymore. Users should use pfn_mapped[] or just
> 1UL<<(32-PAGE_SHIFT) instead.
> 
> The only user of max_low_pfn_mapped is ACPI_INITRD_TABLE_OVERRIDE.
> We could change to use 1U<<(32_PAGE_SHIFT) with it, aka under 4G.

                                ^ typo

...
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> index e721863..93e3194 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -624,9 +624,9 @@ void __init acpi_initrd_override(void *data, size_t size)
>  	if (table_nr == 0)
>  		return;
>  
> -	acpi_tables_addr =
> -		memblock_find_in_range(0, max_low_pfn_mapped << PAGE_SHIFT,
> -				       all_tables_size, PAGE_SIZE);
> +	/* under 4G at first, then above 4G */
> +	acpi_tables_addr = memblock_find_in_range(0, (1ULL<<32) - 1,
> +					all_tables_size, PAGE_SIZE);

No bigge, but why (1ULL << 32) - 1?  Shouldn't it be just 1ULL << 32?
memblock deals with [@start, @end) areas, right?

Other than that,

 Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/