[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080412223319.372887160@symbol.fehenstaub.lan>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 00:33:19 +0200
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
Yasunori Goto <y-goto@...fujitsu.com>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Subject: [patch 0/2] bootmem: Fix node-setup agnostic free_bootmem()
[the first send didn't make it to lkml, so here it is again]
Hi,
as I was doing some clean-ups in the bootmem allocator, I noticed the
patch
5a982cbc7b3fe6cf72266f319286f29963c71b9e
mm: fix boundary checking in free_bootmem_core
which seems to implement the opposite of what the subject promises.
It makes input arguments acceptable if they are `a bit wrong' and
silently aborts if they are completely off the whack.
Please have a look at the two patches I propose: one to revert the
original and the other one to reimplement what the whole thing was
really about: having free_bootmem() itself look up the node holding
the specified address range.
Note also that the reverted patch changed a helper function and
therefore also affected free_bootmem_node(), making the latter paper
over bugs as well.
Hannes
Original version:
mm/bootmem.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------
1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
New version:
bootmem.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists