[PATCH] fix minor error about efi memory_present

[PATCH] fix minor error about efi memory_present

[bibo,mao]

Hi, 
   Function efi_memory_present_wrapper parameter start/end is physical address,
but function memory_present parameter is PFN, this patch converts physical
address to PFN.

  Signed-off-by: bibo, mao <bibo.mao@intel.com>

thanks
bibo,mao

diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c b/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
index 519e63c..141041d 100644
--- a/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
+++ b/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
@@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ efi_find_max_pfn(unsigned long start, un
 static int __init
 efi_memory_present_wrapper(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, void *arg)
 {
-	memory_present(0, start, end);
+	memory_present(0, PFN_UP(start), PFN_DOWN(end));
 	return 0;
 }
 

Re: [PATCH] fix minor error about efi memory_present

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:42:33 +0800
"bibo,mao" <bibo.mao@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi, 
>    Function efi_memory_present_wrapper parameter start/end is physical address,
> but function memory_present parameter is PFN, this patch converts physical
> address to PFN.
> 
>   Signed-off-by: bibo, mao <bibo.mao@intel.com>
> 
> thanks
> bibo,mao
> 
> diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c b/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
> index 519e63c..141041d 100644
> --- a/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ efi_find_max_pfn(unsigned long start, un
>  static int __init
>  efi_memory_present_wrapper(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, void *arg)
>  {
> -	memory_present(0, start, end);
> +	memory_present(0, PFN_UP(start), PFN_DOWN(end));
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  

It doesn't _seem_ like a "minor error".  How come people's machines haven't
been crashing all over the place?

Re: [PATCH] fix minor error about efi memory_present

[bibo,mao]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:42:33 +0800
> "bibo,mao" <bibo.mao@intel.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi, 
>>    Function efi_memory_present_wrapper parameter start/end is physical address,
>> but function memory_present parameter is PFN, this patch converts physical
>> address to PFN.
>>
>>   Signed-off-by: bibo, mao <bibo.mao@intel.com>
>>
>> thanks
>> bibo,mao
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c b/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
>> index 519e63c..141041d 100644
>> --- a/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
>> +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/setup.c
>> @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ efi_find_max_pfn(unsigned long start, un
>>  static int __init
>>  efi_memory_present_wrapper(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, void *arg)
>>  {
>> -	memory_present(0, start, end);
>> +	memory_present(0, PFN_UP(start), PFN_DOWN(end));
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
> 
> It doesn't _seem_ like a "minor error".  How come people's machines haven't
> been crashing all over the place?
This patch is only efi bios relative, most machines in the market are
legacy bios. System only crashes when booting from EFI bios.

thanks
bibo,mao
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

[PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

[Eric Dumazet]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 469 bytes --]

[PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

This patch does three things

1) reorder 'struct vm_struct' to speedup lookups on CPUS with small cache 
lines. The fields 'next,addr,size' should be now in the same cache line, to 
speedup lookups.

2) One minor cleanup in __get_vm_area_node()

3) Bugfixes in vmalloc_user() and vmalloc_32_user()
NULL returns from __vmalloc() and __find_vm_area() were not tested.


Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>

[-- Attachment #2: vmalloc.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1776 bytes --]

--- linux-2.6/include/linux/vmalloc.h	2006-10-23 10:09:48.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6-ed/include/linux/vmalloc.h	2006-10-23 10:26:37.000000000 +0200
@@ -23,13 +23,14 @@
 #endif
 
 struct vm_struct {
+	/* keep next,addr,size together to speedup lookups */
+	struct vm_struct	*next;
 	void			*addr;
 	unsigned long		size;
 	unsigned long		flags;
 	struct page		**pages;
 	unsigned int		nr_pages;
 	unsigned long		phys_addr;
-	struct vm_struct	*next;
 };
 
 /*
--- linux-2.6/mm/vmalloc.c	2006-10-23 10:11:43.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6-ed/mm/vmalloc.c	2006-10-23 10:17:52.000000000 +0200
@@ -180,15 +180,13 @@
 	addr = ALIGN(start, align);
 	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
 
+	if (unlikely(!size))
+		return NULL;
+
 	area = kmalloc_node(sizeof(*area), GFP_KERNEL, node);
 	if (unlikely(!area))
 		return NULL;
 
-	if (unlikely(!size)) {
-		kfree (area);
-		return NULL;
-	}
-
 	/*
 	 * We always allocate a guard page.
 	 */
@@ -528,11 +526,13 @@
 	void *ret;
 
 	ret = __vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_ZERO, PAGE_KERNEL);
-	write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
-	area = __find_vm_area(ret);
-	area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
-	write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
-
+	if (ret) {
+		write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
+		area = __find_vm_area(ret);
+		if (area)
+			area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
+		write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
+	}
 	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(vmalloc_user);
@@ -601,11 +601,13 @@
 	void *ret;
 
 	ret = __vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO, PAGE_KERNEL);
-	write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
-	area = __find_vm_area(ret);
-	area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
-	write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
-
+	if (ret) {
+		write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
+		area = __find_vm_area(ret);
+		if (area)
+			area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
+		write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
+	}
 	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(vmalloc_32_user);

Re: [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

[Nick Piggin]

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes
> 
> This patch does three things
> 
> 1) reorder 'struct vm_struct' to speedup lookups on CPUS with small cache 
> lines. The fields 'next,addr,size' should be now in the same cache line, to 
> speedup lookups.
> 
> 2) One minor cleanup in __get_vm_area_node()
> 
> 3) Bugfixes in vmalloc_user() and vmalloc_32_user()
> NULL returns from __vmalloc() and __find_vm_area() were not tested.

Hmm, so they weren't. As far as testing the return of __find_vm_area,
you can just turn that into a BUG_ON(!area), because at that point,
we've established that the vmalloc succeeded.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 

Re: [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

[Eric Dumazet]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 872 bytes --]

On Monday 23 October 2006 11:13, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > 3) Bugfixes in vmalloc_user() and vmalloc_32_user()
> > NULL returns from __vmalloc() and __find_vm_area() were not tested.
>
> Hmm, so they weren't. As far as testing the return of __find_vm_area,
> you can just turn that into a BUG_ON(!area), because at that point,
> we've established that the vmalloc succeeded.

OK :) 

[PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

This patch does three things

1) reorder 'struct vm_struct' to speedup lookups on CPUS with small cache 
lines. The fields 'next,addr,size' should be now in the same cache line, to 
speedup lookups.

2) One minor cleanup in __get_vm_area_node()

3) Bugfixes in vmalloc_user() and vmalloc_32_user()
NULL returns from __vmalloc() and __find_vm_area() were not tested.


Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>

[-- Attachment #2: vmalloc.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1784 bytes --]

--- linux-2.6/include/linux/vmalloc.h	2006-10-23 10:09:48.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6-ed/include/linux/vmalloc.h	2006-10-23 10:26:37.000000000 +0200
@@ -23,13 +23,14 @@
 #endif
 
 struct vm_struct {
+	/* keep next,addr,size together to speedup lookups */
+	struct vm_struct	*next;
 	void			*addr;
 	unsigned long		size;
 	unsigned long		flags;
 	struct page		**pages;
 	unsigned int		nr_pages;
 	unsigned long		phys_addr;
-	struct vm_struct	*next;
 };
 
 /*
--- linux-2.6/mm/vmalloc.c	2006-10-23 10:11:43.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6-ed/mm/vmalloc.c	2006-10-23 11:26:47.000000000 +0200
@@ -180,15 +180,13 @@
 	addr = ALIGN(start, align);
 	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
 
+	if (unlikely(!size))
+		return NULL;
+
 	area = kmalloc_node(sizeof(*area), GFP_KERNEL, node);
 	if (unlikely(!area))
 		return NULL;
 
-	if (unlikely(!size)) {
-		kfree (area);
-		return NULL;
-	}
-
 	/*
 	 * We always allocate a guard page.
 	 */
@@ -528,11 +526,13 @@
 	void *ret;
 
 	ret = __vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_HIGHMEM | __GFP_ZERO, PAGE_KERNEL);
-	write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
-	area = __find_vm_area(ret);
-	area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
-	write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
-
+	if (ret) {
+		write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
+		area = __find_vm_area(ret);
+		BUG_ON(!area);
+		area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
+		write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
+	}
 	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(vmalloc_user);
@@ -601,11 +601,13 @@
 	void *ret;
 
 	ret = __vmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO, PAGE_KERNEL);
-	write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
-	area = __find_vm_area(ret);
-	area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
-	write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
-
+	if (ret) {
+		write_lock(&vmlist_lock);
+		area = __find_vm_area(ret);
+		BUG_ON(!area);
+		area->flags |= VM_USERMAP;
+		write_unlock(&vmlist_lock);
+	}
 	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(vmalloc_32_user);

Re: [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

[Zwane Mwaikambo]

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:

> Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes
> > 
> > This patch does three things
> > 
> > 1) reorder 'struct vm_struct' to speedup lookups on CPUS with small cache
> > lines. The fields 'next,addr,size' should be now in the same cache line, to
> > speedup lookups.
> > 
> > 2) One minor cleanup in __get_vm_area_node()
> > 
> > 3) Bugfixes in vmalloc_user() and vmalloc_32_user()
> > NULL returns from __vmalloc() and __find_vm_area() were not tested.
> 
> Hmm, so they weren't. As far as testing the return of __find_vm_area,
> you can just turn that into a BUG_ON(!area), because at that point,
> we've established that the vmalloc succeeded.

No need for a BUG_ON it'll simply be a NULL dereference, at which point 
we're back to the original code.

	Zwane

Re: [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes

[Eric Dumazet]

Zwane Mwaikambo a écrit :
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
>> Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> [PATCH] vmalloc : optimization, cleanup, bugfixes
>>>
>>> This patch does three things
>>>
>>> 1) reorder 'struct vm_struct' to speedup lookups on CPUS with small cache
>>> lines. The fields 'next,addr,size' should be now in the same cache line, to
>>> speedup lookups.
>>>
>>> 2) One minor cleanup in __get_vm_area_node()
>>>
>>> 3) Bugfixes in vmalloc_user() and vmalloc_32_user()
>>> NULL returns from __vmalloc() and __find_vm_area() were not tested.
>> Hmm, so they weren't. As far as testing the return of __find_vm_area,
>> you can just turn that into a BUG_ON(!area), because at that point,
>> we've established that the vmalloc succeeded.
> 
> No need for a BUG_ON it'll simply be a NULL dereference, at which point 
> we're back to the original code.

Indeed

This is what Andrew said one week ago :)