From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qy0-f186.google.com (mail-qy0-f186.google.com [209.85.221.186]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98492B7B7A for ; Sun, 18 Oct 2009 02:42:05 +1100 (EST) Received: by qyk16 with SMTP id 16so2045549qyk.15 for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:42:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091017235117U.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> References: <20091013091017.GA18431@localhost.localdomain> <20091017224028V.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <961aa3350910170743n4c9947d1ka0bd31aa1c7b9917@mail.gmail.com> <20091017235117U.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:42:04 +0900 Message-ID: <961aa3350910170842w58a72be0id5fbd0e3a5058a1c@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] bitmap: Introduce bitmap_set, bitmap_clear, bitmap_find_next_zero_area From: Akinobu Mita To: FUJITA Tomonori Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: fenghua.yu@intel.com, gregkh@suse.de, tglx@linutronix.de, tony.luck@intel.com, x86@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-altix@sgi.com, yevgenyp@mellanox.co.il, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, mingo@redhat.com, paulus@samba.org, hpa@zytor.com, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, LW@karo-electronics.de List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> >> --- a/lib/iommu-helper.c >> >> +++ b/lib/iommu-helper.c >> >> @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ again: >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 index =3D (index + align_mask) & ~align_mask; >> >> >> >> =A0 =A0 =A0 end =3D index + nr; >> >> - =A0 =A0 if (end >=3D size) >> >> + =A0 =A0 if (end > size) >> > >> > I think that this is intentional; the last byte of the limit doesn't >> > work. >> >> It looks ok to me. Without above change, find_next_zero_area cannot >> find a 64 bits zeroed area in next sample code. > > I meant that we don't want to find such area for IOMMUs (IIRC, it code > came from POWER IOMMU). OK, I see. I think we need the comment about it. So we cannot replace find_next_zero_area by bitmap_find_next_zero_area and current -mmotm has the bug introduced by this patch in iommu-helper and I also introduced the bug in bitmap_find_next_zero_area if align_mask !=3D 0 in bitmap-introduce-bitmap_set-bitmap_clear-bitmap_find_next_zero_area-fix.pat= ch Andrew, please drop lib-iommu-helperc-fix-off-by-one-error-in-find_next_zero_area.patch iommu-helper-simplify-find_next_zero_area.patch bitmap-introduce-bitmap_set-bitmap_clear-bitmap_find_next_zero_area.patch bitmap-introduce-bitmap_set-bitmap_clear-bitmap_find_next_zero_area-fix.pat= ch iommu-helper-use-bitmap-library.patch isp1362-hcd-use-bitmap_find_next_zero_area.patch mlx4-use-bitmap_find_next_zero_area.patch sparc-use-bitmap_find_next_zero_area.patch ia64-use-bitmap_find_next_zero_area.patch genalloc-use-bitmap_find_next_zero_area.patch I'll overhaul the patchset and retry again.