On Thu, 2011-03-31 at 15:16 +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > > +unsigned long alloc_contig_freed_pages(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, > + gfp_t flag) > +{ > + unsigned long pfn = start, count; > + struct page *page; > + struct zone *zone; > + int order; > + > + VM_BUG_ON(!pfn_valid(start)); This seems kinda mean. Could we return an error? I understand that this is largely going to be an early-boot thing, but surely trying to punt on crappy input beats a full-on BUG(). if (!pfn_valid(start)) return -1; > + zone = page_zone(pfn_to_page(start)); > + > + spin_lock_irq(&zone->lock); > + > + page = pfn_to_page(pfn); > + for (;;) { > + VM_BUG_ON(page_count(page) || !PageBuddy(page)); > + list_del(&page->lru); > + order = page_order(page); > + zone->free_area[order].nr_free--; > + rmv_page_order(page); > + __mod_zone_page_state(zone, NR_FREE_PAGES, -(1UL << order)); > + pfn += 1 << order; > + if (pfn >= end) > + break; If start->end happens to span the end of a zone, I believe this will jump out of the zone. It will still be pfn_valid(), but potentially not in the same zone. > + VM_BUG_ON(!pfn_valid(pfn)); > + page += 1 << order; > + } That will break on SPARSEMEM. You potentially need to revalidate the pfn->page mapping on every MAX_ORDER pfn change. It's easiest to just do pfn_to_page() on each loop. > + > + spin_unlock_irq(&zone->lock); > > +void free_contig_pages(struct page *page, int nr_pages) > +{ > + for (; nr_pages; --nr_pages, ++page) > + __free_page(page); > +} Can't help but notice that this resembles a bit of a patch I posted last week: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg16364.html We'll have to make sure we only have one copy of this in the end. -- Dave -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html