Re: [PATCH 3/3] powerpc/mm: Use VMALLOC_START to validate addr

["Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>]

Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> writes:

> Le 23/06/2022 à 14:29, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
>> Instead of high_memory use VMALLOC_START to validate that the address is
>> not in the vmalloc range.
>> 
>> Cc: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
>> Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h
>> index e5f75c70eda8..256cad69e42e 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h
>> @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ static inline bool pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)
>>   
>>   #define virt_addr_valid(vaddr)	({					\
>>   	unsigned long _addr = (unsigned long)vaddr;			\
>> -	_addr >= PAGE_OFFSET && _addr < (unsigned long)high_memory &&	\
>> +	_addr >= PAGE_OFFSET && _addr < (unsigned long)VMALLOC_START &&	\
>>   	pfn_valid(virt_to_pfn(_addr));					\
>>   })
>>   
>
> What about booke/64 ?
>
> The test will be _addr >= 0xc000000000000000 && _addr < 
> 0x8000000000000000 so the test will be always false.
>

Ok, I didn't realize that booke/64 have vmalloc range below direct map.
I guess we should drop patch 3.

-aneesh