Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: print debug values in Kib not MB

[Prarit Bhargava <prarit-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 07/29/2014 04:29 PM, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
>> index 87fc96b..3875090 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
>> @@ -384,10 +384,10 @@ static void __init print_efi_memmap(void)
>>  	     p < memmap.map_end;
>>  	     p += memmap.desc_size, i++) {
>>  		md = p;
>> -		pr_info("mem%02u: type=%u, attr=0x%llx, range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx) (%lluMB)\n",
>> +		pr_info("mem%02u: type=%u, attr=0x%llx, range=[0x%016llx-0x%016llx) (%lluKiB)\n",
>>  			i, md->type, md->attribute, md->phys_addr,
>>  			md->phys_addr + (md->num_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT),
>> -			(md->num_pages >> (20 - EFI_PAGE_SHIFT)));
>> +			(md->num_pages << 2));
>>  	}
>>  #endif  /*  EFI_DEBUG  */
>>  }
> 
> If EFI_PAGE_SHIFT were to ever change from its hard-coded 12, then this 
> would be wrong.  Any reason to not simply print EFI_PAGE_SIZE and 
> md->num_pages?

Hmm ... maybe it might be better to print out (md->num_pages * EFI_PAGE_SIZE) >>
10 ?  I'll just double check that in a kernel and repost.

Thanks for the suggestion David :)

P.
>