[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE9FiQWXYGdAp82HE8Jg=HYdxWa5nPC5g63E6rNNwYyAQ-B5tg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:47:41 -0700
From: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Jiang Liu <liuj97@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm, nobootmem: fix wrong usage of max_low_pfn
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:15 PM, Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com> wrote:
> max_low_pfn reflect the number of _pages_ in the system,
> not the maximum PFN. You can easily find that fact in init_bootmem().
> So fix it.
I'm confused. for x86, we have max_low_pfn defined in ...
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
/* max_low_pfn get updated here */
find_low_pfn_range();
#else
num_physpages = max_pfn;
check_x2apic();
/* How many end-of-memory variables you have, grandma! */
/* need this before calling reserve_initrd */
if (max_pfn > (1UL<<(32 - PAGE_SHIFT)))
max_low_pfn = e820_end_of_low_ram_pfn();
else
max_low_pfn = max_pfn;
and under max_low_pfn is bootmem.
>
> Additionally, if 'start_pfn == end_pfn', we don't need to go futher,
> so change range check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
>
> diff --git a/mm/nobootmem.c b/mm/nobootmem.c
> index 5e07d36..4711e91 100644
> --- a/mm/nobootmem.c
> +++ b/mm/nobootmem.c
> @@ -110,9 +110,9 @@ static unsigned long __init __free_memory_core(phys_addr_t start,
> {
> unsigned long start_pfn = PFN_UP(start);
> unsigned long end_pfn = min_t(unsigned long,
> - PFN_DOWN(end), max_low_pfn);
> + PFN_DOWN(end), min_low_pfn);
what is min_low_pfn ? is it 0 for x86?
Thanks
Yinghai
--
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