linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] x86/efi: print size and base in binary units in efi_print

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: <20160121143558.2ae43ccf550e1693cd05834f@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:35:58 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Robert Elliott <elliott@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] x86/efi: print size and base in binary units in
 efi_print_memmap

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 17:22:31 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> From: Robert Elliott <elliott@....com>
> 
> Print the base in the best-fit B, KiB, MiB, etc. units rather than
> always MiB. This avoids rounding, which can be misleading.
> 
> Use proper IEC binary units (KiB, MiB, etc.) rather than misuse SI
> decimal units (KB, MB, etc.).
> 
> old:
>     efi: mem61: [Persistent Memory  |   |  |  |  |  |  |   |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x0000000880000000-0x0000000c7fffffff) (16384MB)
> 
> new:
>     efi: mem61: [Persistent Memory  |   |  |  |  |  |  |   |WB|WT|WC|UC] range=[0x0000000880000000-0x0000000c7fffffff] (16 GiB)

hm,

> @@ -225,21 +235,20 @@ int __init efi_memblock_x86_reserve_range(void)
>  void __init efi_print_memmap(void)
>  {
>  #ifdef EFI_DEBUG
> -	efi_memory_desc_t *md;
>  	void *p;
>  	int i;
>  
>  	for (p = memmap.map, i = 0;
>  	     p < memmap.map_end;
>  	     p += memmap.desc_size, i++) {
> -		char buf[64];
> +		efi_memory_desc_t *md = p;
> +		u64 size = md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT;
> +		char buf[64], buf3[32];
>  
> -		md = p;
> -		pr_info("mem%02u: %s range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx] (%lluMB)\n",
> +		pr_info("mem%02u: %s range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx] (%s)\n",
>  			i, efi_md_typeattr_format(buf, sizeof(buf), md),
> -			md->phys_addr,
> -			md->phys_addr + (md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT) - 1,

Where did this " - 1" come from?  I can't find a tree which has this.

> -			(md->num_pages >> (20 - EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)));
> +			md->phys_addr, md->phys_addr + size - 1,

So I did s/ - 1// here, but worried.

> +			efi_size_format(buf3, sizeof(buf3), size));
>  	}
>  #endif  /*  EFI_DEBUG  */
>  }