Re: [PATCH v3] memblock: make memblock_find_in_range method private

Catalin Marinas
2021-08-03T18:05:40Z

On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:42:18AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> index 8490ed2917ff..0bffd2d1854f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ phys_addr_t arm64_dma_phys_limit __ro_after_init;
> static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
> {
> unsigned long long crash_base, crash_size;
> + unsigned long long crash_max = arm64_dma_phys_limit;
> int ret;
>
> ret = parse_crashkernel(boot_command_line, memblock_phys_mem_size(),
> @@ -84,33 +85,18 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>
> crash_size = PAGE_ALIGN(crash_size);
>
> - if (crash_base == 0) {
> - /* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */
> - crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0, arm64_dma_phys_limit,
> - crash_size, SZ_2M);
> - if (crash_base == 0) {
> - pr_warn("cannot allocate crashkernel (size:0x%llx)\n",
> - crash_size);
> - return;
> - }
> - } else {
> - /* User specifies base address explicitly. */
> - if (!memblock_is_region_memory(crash_base, crash_size)) {
> - pr_warn("cannot reserve crashkernel: region is not memory\n");
> - return;
> - }
> + /* User specifies base address explicitly. */
> + if (crash_base)
> + crash_max = crash_base + crash_size;
>
> - if (memblock_is_region_reserved(crash_base, crash_size)) {
> - pr_warn("cannot reserve crashkernel: region overlaps reserved memory\n");
> - return;
> - }
> -
> - if (!IS_ALIGNED(crash_base, SZ_2M)) {
> - pr_warn("cannot reserve crashkernel: base address is not 2MB aligned\n");
> - return;
> - }
> + /* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */
> + crash_base = memblock_phys_alloc_range(crash_size, SZ_2M,
> + crash_base, crash_max);
> + if (!crash_base) {
> + pr_warn("cannot allocate crashkernel (size:0x%llx)\n",
> + crash_size);
> + return;
> }
> - memblock_reserve(crash_base, crash_size);

We'll miss a bit on debug information provided to the user in case of a
wrong crash_base/size option on the command line. Not sure we care much,
though the alignment would probably be useful (maybe we document it
somewhere).

What I haven't checked is whether memblock_phys_alloc_range() aims to
get a 2MB aligned end (size) as well. If crash_size is not 2MB aligned,
crash_max wouldn't be either and the above could fail. We only care
about the crash_base to be aligned but the memblock_phys_alloc_range()
doc says that both the start and size would be aligned to this.

--
Catalin