[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1d6c1572-25fd-4865-9a61-d58d58d163f1@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 15:37:37 +0100
From: "Jiaxun Yang" <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
To: "David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"Bernardo C. Gutierrez Cantu" <bercantu@...zon.de>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, "kernel test robot" <lkp@...el.com>, rppt@...nel.org,
yajun.deng@...ux.dev, "Huang Pei" <huangpei@...ngson.cn>,
"Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
"Huacai Chen" <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
"linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memblock: Fix arguments passed to memblock_set_node()
在2025年4月25日周五 下午3:18,David Woodhouse写道:
[...]
Hi David & co,
>
>
> I did a quick grep for memblock_set_node() callers, and the one in
> szmem() in arch/mips/loongson64/init.c looks odd.
>
> /* set nid for reserved memory */
> memblock_set_node((u64)node << 44, (u64)(node + 1) << 44,
> &memblock.reserved, node);
>
> At first glance I suspect the 'size' should just be (1<<44) or maybe it
> should be inside the loop over the memmap, and called with mem_start,
> mem_size each time?
You are right, it should be (1 << 44), it is an oversight when I was
converting MIPS private boot allocator to memblock.
>
> And why are we calling memblock_reserve() for what appears to be a
> single system-wide vgabios_addr, repeatedly each time szmem() is called
> for a different NUMA node?
Alas this should be done only for node 0.
Thanks
>
>
> 附件:
> * smime.p7s
--
- Jiaxun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists