[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1444151812.10788.14.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:16:52 -0400
From: Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/3] arm64: support initrd outside kernel linear map
On Tue, 2015-10-06 at 18:11 +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 12:31:13PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 06:01:06PM +0100, Mark Salter wrote:
> > > The use of mem= could leave part or all of the initrd outside of
> > > the kernel linear map. This will lead to an error when unpacking
> > > the initrd and a probable failure to boot. This patch catches that
> > > situation and relocates the initrd to be fully within the linear
> > > map.
> >
> > With next-20150908, this patch results in a confusing message at boot when not
> > using an initrd:
> >
> > Moving initrd from [4080000000-407fffffff] to [9fff49000-9fff48fff]
> >
> > I think that can be solved by folding in the diff below.
>
> Mark, it looks like this fell by the wayside.
>
> Do you have any objection to this? I'll promote this to it's own patch
> if not.
>
> Mark.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark.
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> > index 6bab21f..2322479 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> > @@ -364,6 +364,8 @@ static void __init relocate_initrd(void)
> > to_free = ram_end - orig_start;
> >
> > size = orig_end - orig_start;
> > + if (!size)
> > + return;
> >
> > /* initrd needs to be relocated completely inside linear mapping */
> > new_start = memblock_find_in_range(0, PFN_PHYS(max_pfn),
Sorry, no. That looks perfectly good to me.
--
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