From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
suresh.b.siddha@intel.com
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2.6.39-rc5] ioremap: Delay sanity check until after a successful mapping
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:00:30 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DB99D2E.9080106@canonical.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 261 bytes --]
While tracking down the reason for an ioremap() failure I was distracted
by the WARN_ONCE() in __ioremap_caller(). Can we move the sanity check
later in the function until _after_ the mapping has been performed?
rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-ioremap-Delay-sanity-check-until-after-a-successful-.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2086 bytes --]
>From 31dec327a254888fcd0b6aa963414b09626d3168 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:07:51 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] ioremap: Delay sanity check until after a successful mapping
Performing a WARN_ONCE() sanity check before the mapping
is successful seems pointless if the caller sends bad values.
A case in point is when the BIOS provides erroneous screen_info values
causing vesafb_probe() to request an outrageuous size. The
WARN_ONCE is then wasted on bogosity. Move the warning to a
point where the mapping has been successfully allocated.
http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/772042
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
---
arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
index 0369843..be1ef57 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
@@ -91,13 +91,6 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr,
return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);
/*
- * Check if the request spans more than any BAR in the iomem resource
- * tree.
- */
- WARN_ONCE(iomem_map_sanity_check(phys_addr, size),
- KERN_INFO "Info: mapping multiple BARs. Your kernel is fine.");
-
- /*
* Don't allow anybody to remap normal RAM that we're using..
*/
last_pfn = last_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
@@ -170,6 +163,13 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr,
ret_addr = (void __iomem *) (vaddr + offset);
mmiotrace_ioremap(unaligned_phys_addr, unaligned_size, ret_addr);
+ /*
+ * Check if the request spans more than any BAR in the iomem resource
+ * tree.
+ */
+ WARN_ONCE(iomem_map_sanity_check(unaligned_phys_addr, unaligned_size),
+ KERN_INFO "Info: mapping multiple BARs. Your kernel is fine.");
+
return ret_addr;
err_free_area:
free_vm_area(area);
--
1.7.0.4
next reply other threads:[~2011-04-28 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-28 17:00 Tim Gardner [this message]
2011-04-28 19:49 ` [PATCH 2.6.39-rc5] ioremap: Delay sanity check until after a successful mapping Suresh Siddha
2011-04-29 6:31 ` [tip:x86/mm] " tip-bot for Tim Gardner
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=4DB99D2E.9080106@canonical.com \
--to=tim.gardner@canonical.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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.