Re: x86: Debug warning: early ioremap leak of 2 areas detected.

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> sidenote, is this failure normal:
>
>   
>> acpiphp_ibm: ibm_acpiphp_init: acpi_walk_namespace failed
>>     
>
> ?
>   

Yes, I see it on all boots.  When booting native, I get a "acpiphp: too 
many resources found"  message (I'll get the exact wording next time I 
boot).

> the leaked ioremap seems to be:
>
>   
>> early_ioremap(2fff0a10, 00000040) [1] => Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24-rc8 #1877
>> [<c04e3913>] early_ioremap+0x49/0x157
>> [<c0117057>] __acpi_map_table+0x2f/0x31
>> [<c0279459>] acpi_os_map_memory+0x1a/0x1c
>> [<c028b4fc>] acpi_tb_verify_table+0x20/0x4d
>> [<c028acea>] acpi_get_table+0x4a/0x91
>> [<c04ec303>] acpi_processor_init+0x35/0xcf
>> [<c04d44b8>] kernel_init+0x14f/0x2a5
>> [<c0107c12>] ? ret_from_fork+0x6/0x1c
>> [<c04d4369>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x2a5
>> [<c04d4369>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x2a5
>> [<c01089f3>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
>> =======================
>> 00000a10 + ffd40000
>>     
>
>   
>> Debug warning: early ioremap leak of 2 areas detected.
>> please boot with early_ioremap_debug and report the dmesg.
>>     
>
> hm, why does it say 2? I only see a single backtrace in the dmesg you 
> sent. ( Could you boot with ignore_loglevel to make sure you get all 
> printks to the log? )
>   

Even with ignore_loglevel, only one trace appears in the log.

> Btw., did the bootup otherwise go fine? The typical nesting is at most 2 
> levels, and i've kept the max nesting at 4 so the typical 1-2 leaks 
> should have no functional/correctness aspect on the bootup, just that 
> warning message. Once we hit the 5th leaked ioremap we start rejecting 
> early_ioremap()s and that might result in boot failures.
>   

Yep, it made it up to userspace fine.  I'll try a boot on real hardware 
soon.

    J