[PATCH 0/2] arm64: ignore memory outside of the linear range

[will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 02:58:26PM +0100, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 09:00:43AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > >> This is a followup to the single patch I posted on Aug 15th to ignore
> > > >> RAM that cannot be covered by the linear mapping. Instead of clipping
> > > >> the memory after the fact, this clips the memory before installing the
> > > >> regions into the memblock memory table.
> > > >>
> > > >> This is basically the approach that Mark Rutland suggested here
> > > >>
> > > >> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/430239
> > > >>
> > > >> but modified to correctly consider the base of the kernel image as the
> > > >> start of the linear mapping.
> > > >>
> > > >> Ard Biesheuvel (2):
> > > >>   of/fdt: make memblock maximum physical address arch configurable
> > > >>   arm64: set MAX_MEMBLOCK_ADDR according to linear region size
> > > >>
> > > >>  arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h |  8 ++++++++
> > > >>  drivers/of/fdt.c                | 12 +++++++-----
> > > >>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Tested on Freescale LS2085ARDB which has a split memory region
> > > > that triggers the bug.
> > > >
> > > > Tested-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>
> > > >
> > >
> > > Will you be picking up this series for v4.3? If so, do you need me to
> > > resend it with the tags added?
> > 
> > Sorry, I missed Rob's ack on the of/fdt.c change. I'll pick these up
> > later today, no need to resend.
> 
> Are we sending to stable as well?

I've already pushed the patch out without a Cc stable (it's not a
regression afaict), so if you want it backported then you'll need to send
it to stable separately.

Will