linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 03/29] mm: remove CONFIG_HAVE

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: <20180919114507.000059f3@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Sep 2018 11:45:07 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:     <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "Michael Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/29] mm: remove CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 13:34:57 +0300
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi Jonathan,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:04:49AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 18:59:18 +0300
> > Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >   
> > > All architecures use memblock for early memory management. There is no need
> > > for the CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK configuration option.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>  
> > 
> > Hi Mike,
> > 
> > A minor editing issue in here that is stopping boot on arm64 platforms with latest
> > version of the mm tree.  
> 
> Can you please try the following patch:
> 
> 
> From 079bd5d24a01df3df9500d0a33d89cb9f7da4588 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 13:29:27 +0300
> Subject: [PATCH] of/fdt: fixup #ifdefs after removal of HAVE_MEMBLOCK config
>  option
> 
> The removal of HAVE_MEMBLOCK configuration option, mistakenly dropped the
> wrong #endif. This patch restores that #endif and removes the part that
> should have been actually removed, starting from #else and up to the
> correct #endif
> 
> Reported-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

Hi Mike,

That's identical to the local patch I'm carrying to fix this so looks good to me.

For what it's worth given you'll probably fold this into the larger patch.

Tested-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>

Thanks for the quick reply.

Jonathan

> ---
>  drivers/of/fdt.c | 21 +--------------------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c
> index 48314e9..bb532aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c
> @@ -1119,6 +1119,7 @@ int __init early_init_dt_scan_chosen(unsigned long node, const char *uname,
>  #endif
>  #ifndef MAX_MEMBLOCK_ADDR
>  #define MAX_MEMBLOCK_ADDR	((phys_addr_t)~0)
> +#endif
>  
>  void __init __weak early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size)
>  {
> @@ -1175,26 +1176,6 @@ int __init __weak early_init_dt_reserve_memory_arch(phys_addr_t base,
>  	return memblock_reserve(base, size);
>  }
>  
> -#else
> -void __init __weak early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size)
> -{
> -	WARN_ON(1);
> -}
> -
> -int __init __weak early_init_dt_mark_hotplug_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size)
> -{
> -	return -ENOSYS;
> -}
> -
> -int __init __weak early_init_dt_reserve_memory_arch(phys_addr_t base,
> -					phys_addr_t size, bool nomap)
> -{
> -	pr_err("Reserved memory not supported, ignoring range %pa - %pa%s\n",
> -		  &base, &size, nomap ? " (nomap)" : "");
> -	return -ENOSYS;
> -}
> -#endif
> -
>  static void * __init early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch(u64 size, u64 align)
>  {
>  	return memblock_alloc(size, align);