From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
To: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
suresh.b.siddha@intel.com
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2.6.39-rc5] ioremap: Delay sanity check until after a successful mapping
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:00:30 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DB99D2E.9080106@canonical.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 261 bytes --]
While tracking down the reason for an ioremap() failure I was distracted
by the WARN_ONCE() in __ioremap_caller(). Can we move the sanity check
later in the function until _after_ the mapping has been performed?
rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-ioremap-Delay-sanity-check-until-after-a-successful-.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2086 bytes --]
>From 31dec327a254888fcd0b6aa963414b09626d3168 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:07:51 -0600
Subject: [PATCH] ioremap: Delay sanity check until after a successful mapping
Performing a WARN_ONCE() sanity check before the mapping
is successful seems pointless if the caller sends bad values.
A case in point is when the BIOS provides erroneous screen_info values
causing vesafb_probe() to request an outrageuous size. The
WARN_ONCE is then wasted on bogosity. Move the warning to a
point where the mapping has been successfully allocated.
http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/772042
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
---
arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c | 14 +++++++-------
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
index 0369843..be1ef57 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
@@ -91,13 +91,6 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr,
return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);
/*
- * Check if the request spans more than any BAR in the iomem resource
- * tree.
- */
- WARN_ONCE(iomem_map_sanity_check(phys_addr, size),
- KERN_INFO "Info: mapping multiple BARs. Your kernel is fine.");
-
- /*
* Don't allow anybody to remap normal RAM that we're using..
*/
last_pfn = last_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
@@ -170,6 +163,13 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr,
ret_addr = (void __iomem *) (vaddr + offset);
mmiotrace_ioremap(unaligned_phys_addr, unaligned_size, ret_addr);
+ /*
+ * Check if the request spans more than any BAR in the iomem resource
+ * tree.
+ */
+ WARN_ONCE(iomem_map_sanity_check(unaligned_phys_addr, unaligned_size),
+ KERN_INFO "Info: mapping multiple BARs. Your kernel is fine.");
+
return ret_addr;
err_free_area:
free_vm_area(area);
--
1.7.0.4
next reply other threads:[~2011-04-28 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-28 17:00 Tim Gardner [this message]
2011-04-28 19:49 ` [PATCH 2.6.39-rc5] ioremap: Delay sanity check until after a successful mapping Suresh Siddha
2011-04-29 6:31 ` [tip:x86/mm] " tip-bot for Tim Gardner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DB99D2E.9080106@canonical.com \
--to=tim.gardner@canonical.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox