linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/23] mm/memblock: debug: correct displaying of upper memory boundary

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

Message-ID: <52A646AB.1030900@ti.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 Dec 2013 17:39:39 -0500
From:	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
To:	<balbi@...com>
CC:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/23] mm/memblock: debug: correct displaying of upper
 memory boundary

On Monday 09 December 2013 04:56 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 04:50:34PM -0500, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
>>
>> When debugging is enabled (cmdline has "memblock=debug") the memblock
>> will display upper memory boundary per each allocated/freed memory range
>> wrongly. For example:
>>  memblock_reserve: [0x0000009e7e8000-0x0000009e7ed000] _memblock_early_alloc_try_nid_nopanic+0xfc/0x12c
>>
>> The 0x0000009e7ed000 is displayed instead of 0x0000009e7ecfff
>>
>> Hence, correct this by changing formula used to calculate upper memory
>> boundary to (u64)base + size - 1 instead of  (u64)base + size everywhere
>> in the debug messages.
>>
>> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
>> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
>> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
> 
> Very minor patch but perhaps we should Cc: stable here ? not that it
> matters much...
> 
Yeah... No major fix as such from stable perspective.

regards,
Santosh
--
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/