[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190817090021.GA10627@rapoport-lnx>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 12:00:22 +0300
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch : arm : add a criteria for pfn_valid
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 11:00:13AM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote:
> From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@...soc.com>
>
> pfn_valid can be wrong while the MSB of physical address be trimed as pfn
> larger than the max_pfn.
How the overflow of __pfn_to_phys() is related to max_pfn?
Where is the guarantee that __pfn_to_phys(max_pfn) won't overflow?
> Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@...il.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/init.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/init.c b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> index c2daabb..9c4d938 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/init.c
> @@ -177,7 +177,8 @@ static void __init zone_sizes_init(unsigned long min, unsigned long max_low,
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
> int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)
> {
> - return memblock_is_map_memory(__pfn_to_phys(pfn));
> + return (pfn > max_pfn) ?
> + false : memblock_is_map_memory(__pfn_to_phys(pfn));
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(pfn_valid);
> #endif
> --
> 1.9.1
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists