[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z_LGqgUhDrTmzj5r@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 20:23:38 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Myrrh Periwinkle <myrrhperiwinkle@...labs.xyz>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Roberto Ricci <io@...icci.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/e820: Fix handling of subpage regions when
calculating nosave ranges
* Myrrh Periwinkle <myrrhperiwinkle@...labs.xyz> wrote:
> The current implementation of e820__register_nosave_regions suffers from
> multiple serious issues:
> - The end of last region is tracked by PFN, causing it to find holes
> that aren't there if two consecutive subpage regions are present
> - The nosave PFN ranges derived from holes are rounded out (instead of
> rounded in) which makes it inconsistent with how explicitly reserved
> regions are handled
>
> Fix this by:
> - Treating reserved regions as if they were holes, to ensure consistent
> handling (rounding out nosave PFN ranges is more correct as the
> kernel does not use partial pages)
> - Tracking the end of the last RAM region by address instead of pages
> to detect holes more precisely
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Fixes: e5540f875404 ("x86/boot/e820: Consolidate 'struct e820_entry *entry' local variable names")
So why is this SHA1 indicated as the root cause? AFAICS that commit
does nothing but cleanups, so it cannot cause such regressions.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists