[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190926073951.GA17200@linux>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 09:40:05 +0200
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
To: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@....ibm.com>
Cc: alastair@...ilva.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] memory_hotplug: Add a bounds check to __add_pages
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:34:05AM +1000, Alastair D'Silva wrote:
> From: Alastair D'Silva <alastair@...ilva.org>
> @@ -291,6 +307,10 @@ int __ref __add_pages(int nid, unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
> unsigned long nr, start_sec, end_sec;
> struct vmem_altmap *altmap = restrictions->altmap;
>
> + err = check_hotplug_memory_addressable(pfn, nr_pages);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
I am probably off here because 1) I am jumping blind in a middle of a discussion and
2) I got back from holydays yesterday, so bear with me.
Would not be better to just place the check in add_memory_resource instead?
Take into account that we create the memory mapping for this range in
arch_add_memory, so it looks weird to me to create the mapping if we are going to
fail right after because the range is simply off.
But as I said, I might be missing some previous discussion.
--
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists