[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1101e3c7-fcb7-a632-8e22-47f4a01ea02e@csgroup.eu>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 11:47:48 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
Le 23/09/2021 à 09:43, Mike Rapoport a écrit :
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> For ages memblock_free() interface dealt with physical addresses even
> despite the existence of memblock_alloc_xx() functions that return a
> virtual pointer.
>
> Introduce memblock_phys_free() for freeing physical ranges and repurpose
> memblock_free() to free virtual pointers to make the following pairing
> abundantly clear:
>
> int memblock_phys_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
> phys_addr_t memblock_phys_alloc(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
>
> void *memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align);
> void memblock_free(void *ptr, size_t size);
>
> Replace intermediate memblock_free_ptr() with memblock_free() and drop
> unnecessary aliases memblock_free_early() and memblock_free_early_nid().
>
> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
> index 1a04e5bdf655..37826d8c4f74 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -723,7 +723,7 @@ void __init smp_save_dump_cpus(void)
> /* Get the CPU registers */
> smp_save_cpu_regs(sa, addr, is_boot_cpu, page);
> }
> - memblock_free(page, PAGE_SIZE);
> + memblock_phys_free(page, PAGE_SIZE);
> diag_amode31_ops.diag308_reset();
> pcpu_set_smt(0);
> }
> @@ -880,7 +880,7 @@ void __init smp_detect_cpus(void)
>
> /* Add CPUs present at boot */
> __smp_rescan_cpus(info, true);
> - memblock_free_early((unsigned long)info, sizeof(*info));
> + memblock_free(info, sizeof(*info));
> }
>
> /*
I'm a bit lost. IIUC memblock_free_early() and memblock_free() where
identical.
In the first hunk memblock_free() gets replaced by memblock_phys_free()
In the second hunk memblock_free_early() gets replaced by memblock_free()
I think it would be easier to follow if you could split it in several
patches:
- First patch: Create memblock_phys_free() and change all relevant
memblock_free() to memblock_phys_free() - Or change memblock_free() to
memblock_phys_free() and make memblock_free() an alias of it.
- Second patch: Make memblock_free_ptr() become memblock_free() and
change all remaining callers to the new semantics (IIUC
memblock_free(__pa(ptr)) becomes memblock_free(ptr) and make
memblock_free_ptr() an alias of memblock_free()
- Fourth patch: Replace and drop memblock_free_ptr()
- Fifth patch: Drop memblock_free_early() and memblock_free_early_nid()
(All users should have been upgraded to memblock_free_phys() in patch 1
or memblock_free() in patch 2)
Christophe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists