From: tj@kernel.org (Tejun Heo)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC 07/23] mm/memblock: debug: correct displaying of upper memory boundary
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:02:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131013180227.GD5253@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1381615146-20342-8-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 05:58:50PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>
>
> When debugging is enabled (cmdline has "memblock=debug") the memblock
> will display upper memory boundary per each allocated/freed memory range
> wrongly. For example:
> memblock_reserve: [0x0000009e7e8000-0x0000009e7ed000] _memblock_early_alloc_try_nid_nopanic+0xfc/0x12c
>
> The 0x0000009e7ed000 is displayed instead of 0x0000009e7ecfff
>
> Hence, correct this by changing formula used to calculate upper memory
> boundary to (u64)base + size - 1 instead of (u64)base + size everywhere
> in the debug messages.
I kinda prefer base + size because it's easier to actually know the
size but yeah, it should have been [base, base + size) and other
places use base + size - 1 notation so it probably is better to stick
to that. Maybe move this one to the beginning of the series?
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Cc: yinghai@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
grygorii.strashko@ti.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 07/23] mm/memblock: debug: correct displaying of upper memory boundary
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:02:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131013180227.GD5253@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1381615146-20342-8-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 05:58:50PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>
>
> When debugging is enabled (cmdline has "memblock=debug") the memblock
> will display upper memory boundary per each allocated/freed memory range
> wrongly. For example:
> memblock_reserve: [0x0000009e7e8000-0x0000009e7ed000] _memblock_early_alloc_try_nid_nopanic+0xfc/0x12c
>
> The 0x0000009e7ed000 is displayed instead of 0x0000009e7ecfff
>
> Hence, correct this by changing formula used to calculate upper memory
> boundary to (u64)base + size - 1 instead of (u64)base + size everywhere
> in the debug messages.
I kinda prefer base + size because it's easier to actually know the
size but yeah, it should have been [base, base + size) and other
places use base + size - 1 notation so it probably is better to stick
to that. Maybe move this one to the beginning of the series?
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
Cc: yinghai@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
grygorii.strashko@ti.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 07/23] mm/memblock: debug: correct displaying of upper memory boundary
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2013 14:02:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131013180227.GD5253@mtj.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1381615146-20342-8-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 05:58:50PM -0400, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> From: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>
>
> When debugging is enabled (cmdline has "memblock=debug") the memblock
> will display upper memory boundary per each allocated/freed memory range
> wrongly. For example:
> memblock_reserve: [0x0000009e7e8000-0x0000009e7ed000] _memblock_early_alloc_try_nid_nopanic+0xfc/0x12c
>
> The 0x0000009e7ed000 is displayed instead of 0x0000009e7ecfff
>
> Hence, correct this by changing formula used to calculate upper memory
> boundary to (u64)base + size - 1 instead of (u64)base + size everywhere
> in the debug messages.
I kinda prefer base + size because it's easier to actually know the
size but yeah, it should have been [base, base + size) and other
places use base + size - 1 notation so it probably is better to stick
to that. Maybe move this one to the beginning of the series?
Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-13 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 89+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-12 21:58 [RFC 00/23] mm: Use memblock interface instead of bootmem Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 01/23] mm/bootmem: remove duplicated declaration of __free_pages_bootmem() Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 02/23] mm/block: remove unnecessary inclusion of bootmem.h Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 03/23] mm/memory_hotplug: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 04/23] mm/staging: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 05/23] mm/char: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 06/23] mm/memblock: Add memblock early memory allocation apis Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-13 17:56 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 17:56 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 17:56 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 18:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-13 18:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-13 18:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-13 18:42 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 18:42 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 18:42 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 13:48 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 13:48 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 13:48 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:39 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:39 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:39 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 14:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 14:58 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 15:03 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 15:03 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 15:03 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 07/23] mm/memblock: debug: correct displaying of upper memory boundary Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-13 18:02 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2013-10-13 18:02 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 18:02 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 14:41 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:41 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:41 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 08/23] mm/memblock: debug: don't free reserved array if !ARCH_DISCARD_MEMBLOCK Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-13 19:51 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 19:51 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 19:51 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 14:41 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:41 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:41 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 09/23] mm/init: Use memblock apis for early memory allocations Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-13 19:54 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 19:54 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-13 19:54 ` Tejun Heo
2013-10-14 14:43 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:43 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-14 14:43 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 10/23] mm/printk: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 11/23] mm/page_alloc: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 12/23] mm/power: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 13/23] mm/lib: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 14/23] " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 15/23] mm/sparse: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` [RFC 16/23] mm/hugetlb: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:58 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 17/23] mm/page_cgroup: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 18/23] mm/percpu: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 19/23] mm/memory_hotplug: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 20/23] mm/firmware: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 21/23] mm/ARM: kernel: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 22/23] mm/ARM: mm: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` [RFC 23/23] mm/ARM: OMAP: " Santosh Shilimkar
2013-10-12 21:59 ` Santosh Shilimkar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131013180227.GD5253@mtj.dyndns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.