[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101006154503.db30e742.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 15:45:03 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memblock: Fix big size with find_region()
On Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:12:35 -0700
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 10/06/2010 02:06 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > This seems rather odd. If some caller is passing in size>end then that
> > caller is buggy isn't it? A memory block which ends at 0x1000 and has
> > a size of 0x2000 is nonsensical.
> >
> > So shouldn't we at leat emit a warning so tht the offending caller can
> > be found and fixed?
> >
>
> I don't think this is necessarily a bug in the caller -- it just
> indicates that it has a request that is impossible to fulfill -- but
> that can happen for a lot of other reasons.
>
> Keep in mind that the range and the size will typically come from
> different origins. As such, it's not clear to me that this is something
> that requires printing a specific error message for any more than any
> other allocation failure, but perhaps you disagree?
>
whomeidunno. The question is "is this something we want to know
about". If it's a BIOS/acpi/whatever error then I'd think "yes",
because that would then lead to useful kernel workarounds or BIOS
updates?
--
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