On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 02:02:25PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
> Some kernel versions running on MIPS split the System RAM memory
> regions reported in /proc/iomem. This may cause loading of the kexec
> kernel to fail if it crosses one of the splits.
>
> Fix by merging adjacent memory ranges that have the same type.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Daney <david.daney at cavium.com>
> ---
> kexec/arch/mips/kexec-mips.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kexec/arch/mips/kexec-mips.c b/kexec/arch/mips/kexec-mips.c
> index 2e5b700..415c2ed 100644
> --- a/kexec/arch/mips/kexec-mips.c
> +++ b/kexec/arch/mips/kexec-mips.c
> @@ -60,10 +60,16 @@ int get_memory_ranges(struct memory_range **range, int *ranges,
> } else {
> continue;
> }
> - memory_range[memory_ranges].start = start;
> - memory_range[memory_ranges].end = end;
> - memory_range[memory_ranges].type = type;
> - memory_ranges++;
> + if (memory_ranges > 0 &&
It seems that this will never merge the first memory range
with subsequent ones. Is that intentional?
> + memory_range[memory_ranges - 1].end == start &&
> + memory_range[memory_ranges - 1].type == type) {
> + memory_range[memory_ranges - 1].end = end;
> + } else {
> + memory_range[memory_ranges].start = start;
> + memory_range[memory_ranges].end = end;
> + memory_range[memory_ranges].type = type;
> + memory_ranges++;
> + }
> }
> fclose(fp);
> *range = memory_range;
> --
> 2.9.5
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>
