Re: [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v4

[Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> please check.
>>
>> [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v4
> 
> I like the approach. That said, I think that rather than do the "modify 
> the e820 array" thing, why not just do it in the in the resource tree, and 
> do it at "e820_reserve_resources_late()" time?
> 
> IOW, something like this.
> 
> TOTALLY UNTESTED! The point is to take all RAM resources we haev, and 
> _after_ we've added all the resources we've seen in the E820 tree, we then 
> _also_ try to add fake reserved entries for any "round up to X" at the end 
> of the RAM resources.
> 
> NOTE! I really didn't want to use "reserve_region_with_split()". I didn't 
> want to recurse into any conflicting resources, I really wanted to just do 
> the other failure cases. 
> 
> THIS PATCH IS NOT MEANT TO BE USED. Just a rough "almost like this" kind 
> of thing. That includes the rough draft of how much to round things up to 
> based on where the end of RAM region is etc. I'm really throwing this out 
> more as a "wouldn't this be a readable way to handle any missing reserved 
> entries" kind of thing..
> 
> 			Linus
> 
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/e820.c |   34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
> index ef2c356..e8b8d33 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
> @@ -1370,6 +1370,23 @@ void __init e820_reserve_resources(void)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +/* How much should we pad RAM ending depending on where it is? */
> +static unsigned long ram_alignment(resource_size_t pos)
> +{
> +	unsigned long mb = pos >> 20;
> +
> +	/* To 64kB in the first megabyte */
> +	if (!mb)
> +		return 64*1024;
> +
> +	/* To 1MB in the first 16MB */
> +	if (mb < 16)
> +		return 1024*1024;
> +
> +	/* To 32MB for anything above that */
> +	return 32*1024*1024;
> +}
> +
>  void __init e820_reserve_resources_late(void)
>  {
>  	int i;
> @@ -1381,6 +1398,23 @@ void __init e820_reserve_resources_late(void)
>  			insert_resource_expand_to_fit(&iomem_resource, res);
>  		res++;
>  	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Try to bump up RAM regions to reasonable boundaries to
> +	 * avoid stolen RAM
> +	 */
> +	for (i = 0; i < e820.nr_map; i++) {
> +		struct e820entry *entry = &e820_saved.map[i];
> +		resource_size_t start, end;
> +
> +		if (entry->type != E820_RAM)
> +			continue;
> +		start = entry->addr + entry->size;
> +		end = round_up(start, ram_alignment(start));
> +		if (start == end)
> +			continue;
> +		reserve_region_with_split(&iomem_resource, start, end, "RAM buffer");
> +	}
>  }
>  
>  char *__init default_machine_specific_memory_setup(void)

except need to change 
> +		reserve_region_with_split(&iomem_resource, start, end, "RAM buffer");
==> > +		reserve_region_with_split(&iomem_resource, start, end - 1, "RAM buffer");

it will make sure dynmical allocating code will not use those range.

and could make e820_setup_gap much simple.

---
 arch/x86/kernel/e820.c |   10 ++++------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
+++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
@@ -635,14 +635,12 @@ __init void e820_setup_gap(void)
 #endif
 
 	/*
-	 * See how much we want to round up: start off with
-	 * rounding to the next 1MB area.
+	 * e820_reserve_resources_late will protect stolen RAM
+	 * so just round it to 1M
 	 */
 	round = 0x100000;
-	while ((gapsize >> 4) > round)
-		round += round;
-	/* Fun with two's complement */
-	pci_mem_start = (gapstart + round) & -round;
+
+	pci_mem_start = roundup(gapstart, round);
 
 	printk(KERN_INFO
 	       "Allocating PCI resources starting at %lx (gap: %lx:%lx)\n",

Ingo, can you put those two patches in tip?

YH