linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] x86/efi: print size and base in binary units in efi_print

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:	Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:08:00 +0200
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Robert Elliott <elliott@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] x86/efi: print size and base in binary units in efi_print_memmap

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:35 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 17:22:31 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Robert Elliott <elliott@....com>
>>
>> Print the base in the best-fit B, KiB, MiB, etc. units rather than
>> always MiB. This avoids rounding, which can be misleading.
>>
>> Use proper IEC binary units (KiB, MiB, etc.) rather than misuse SI
>> decimal units (KB, MB, etc.).
>>
>> old:
>>     efi: mem61: [Persistent Memory  |   |  |  |  |  |  |   |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x0000000880000000-0x0000000c7fffffff) (16384MB)
>>
>> new:
>>     efi: mem61: [Persistent Memory  |   |  |  |  |  |  |   |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x0000000880000000-0x0000000c7fffffff] (16 GiB)
>
> hm,
>
>> @@ -225,21 +235,20 @@ int __init efi_memblock_x86_reserve_range(void)
>>  void __init efi_print_memmap(void)
>>  {
>>  #ifdef EFI_DEBUG
>> -     efi_memory_desc_t *md;
>>       void *p;
>>       int i;
>>
>>       for (p = memmap.map, i = 0;
>>            p < memmap.map_end;
>>            p += memmap.desc_size, i++) {
>> -             char buf[64];
>> +             efi_memory_desc_t *md = p;
>> +             u64 size = md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT;
>> +             char buf[64], buf3[32];
>>
>> -             md = p;
>> -             pr_info("mem%02u: %s range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx] (%lluMB)\n",
>> +             pr_info("mem%02u: %s range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx] (%s)\n",
>>                       i, efi_md_typeattr_format(buf, sizeof(buf), md),
>> -                     md->phys_addr,
>> -                     md->phys_addr + (md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT) - 1,
>
> Where did this " - 1" come from?  I can't find a tree which has this.

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/efi.git/commit/?h=next&id=b324ee15566d9de933e7926c37a4d091904a513b

>
>> -                     (md->num_pages >> (20 - EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)));
>> +                     md->phys_addr, md->phys_addr + size - 1,
>
> So I did s/ - 1// here, but worried.

I'm pretty sure the series should go via efi tree.

>
>> +                     efi_size_format(buf3, sizeof(buf3), size));
>>       }
>>  #endif  /*  EFI_DEBUG  */
>>  }
>



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko