[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190213064419.GA27012@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:44:19 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@....com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@....com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] RISC-V: Free-up initrd in free_initrd_mem()
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 06:32:24AM +0000, Anup Patel wrote:
> index 9cd583b6d1cd..c22b873de856 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -97,8 +97,9 @@ static void __init setup_initrd(void)
> initrd_end = 0;
> }
>
> -void free_initrd_mem(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> +void __init free_initrd_mem(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> {
> + memblock_free(__pa(start), end - start);
I'm pretty sure this should be a call to free_reserved_area instead.
All regions reserved using memblock_reserved and not freed before
initializing the MM are marked reserved and don't have valid page
counts, etc.
So we need the actions in free_reserved_area to actually make the
memory useful. Now every other architecture except for arm64
seems to do fine without a memblock_free. I'm not an expert on
memblock (but I've CCed one), but I guess the reason is that once
the kernel has booted we don't really care about freeing memblock
area.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists