[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101114082502.GA19331@gw.healthdatacare.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 10:25:02 +0200
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@....fi>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ARM: memblock: convert reserve_crashkernel() to
use memblock
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 01:07:00PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 11:06:13AM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
> > {
> > unsigned long long crash_size, crash_base;
> > - unsigned long long total_mem;
> > int ret;
> >
> > - total_mem = get_total_mem();
> > - ret = parse_crashkernel(boot_command_line, total_mem,
> > + /* this is necessary because of memblock_phys_mem_size() */
> > + memblock_analyze();
>
> I think you need to check with the memblock people whether its legal to
> call memblock_analyze() multiple times. What do other arches do for
> this?
At least powerpc and sh do it like the above.
> Secondly, when paging_init() returns, bootmem has been initialized, and
> memory taken from bootmem to feed the zone allocators. This memory is
> not registered back into memblock. Allocations from memblock after
> paging_init() has returned will lead to overlaps with bootmem, and
> therefore corruption.
Ok.
> So, this code is better off left as-is, rather than trying to convert it
> to what mistakenly appears "the latest thing".
Yeah, sounds like it wasn't such a good idea. Please ignore this
patch then.
Thanks,
MW
--
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