linux-kernel - [PATCH 3/4] x86, memblock: Remove __memblock_x86_find_in_range

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4CAA4DEC.4000401@kernel.org>
Date:	Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:58:04 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] x86, memblock: Remove __memblock_x86_find_in_range_size()


Fold it into memblock_x86_find_in_range(), and change bad_addr_size()
to check_reserve_memblock().

So whole memblock_x86_find_in_range_size() code is  more readable.

Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>

---
 arch/x86/mm/memblock.c |   39 +++++++++++----------------------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/memblock.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/mm/memblock.c
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/mm/memblock.c
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
 #include <linux/range.h>
 
 /* Check for already reserved areas */
-static inline bool __init bad_addr_size(u64 *addrp, u64 *sizep, u64 align)
+static bool __init check_with_memblock_reserved_size(u64 *addrp, u64 *sizep, u64 align)
 {
 	struct memblock_region *r;
 	u64 addr = *addrp, last;
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ again:
 			goto again;
 		}
 		if (last <= (r->base + r->size) && addr >= r->base) {
-			(*sizep)++;
+			*sizep = 0;
 			return false;
 		}
 	}
@@ -41,29 +41,6 @@ again:
 	return changed;
 }
 
-static u64 __init __memblock_x86_find_in_range_size(u64 ei_start, u64 ei_last, u64 start,
-			 u64 *sizep, u64 align)
-{
-	u64 addr, last;
-
-	addr = round_up(ei_start, align);
-	if (addr < start)
-		addr = round_up(start, align);
-	if (addr >= ei_last)
-		goto out;
-	*sizep = ei_last - addr;
-	while (bad_addr_size(&addr, sizep, align) && addr + *sizep <= ei_last)
-		;
-	last = addr + *sizep;
-	if (last > ei_last)
-		goto out;
-
-	return addr;
-
-out:
-	return MEMBLOCK_ERROR;
-}
-
 /*
  * Find next free range after start, and size is returned in *sizep
  */
@@ -76,10 +53,16 @@ u64 __init memblock_x86_find_in_range_si
 		u64 ei_last = ei_start + r->size;
 		u64 addr;
 
-		addr = __memblock_x86_find_in_range_size(ei_start, ei_last, start,
-					 sizep, align);
+		addr = round_up(ei_start, align);
+		if (addr < start)
+			addr = round_up(start, align);
+		if (addr >= ei_last)
+			continue;
+		*sizep = ei_last - addr;
+		while (check_with_memblock_reserved_size(&addr, sizep, align))
+			;
 
-		if (addr != MEMBLOCK_ERROR)
+		if (*sizep)
 			return addr;
 	}
 
--
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/