Hello, On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 06:49:40AM +0000, zijun_hu@xxxxxxx wrote: > patch 0001 can fix the issue and pass test successfully, please help to review > and phase-in it > patch 0002 is used to verify the solution only and is provided for explaining > test method, please don't apply it Great. > for __next_mem_range_rev(), it don't iterate through memory regions contained > in type_a in reversed order rightly if its parameter type_b == NULL > moreover, it will cause mass error loops if macro for_each_mem_range_rev is > called with parameter type_b == NULL > > the patch 0001 corrects region index idx_a adjustment and initialize idx_b > to 0 to promise getting the last reversed region correctly if parameter > type_b == NULL as showed below > > my test method is simple, namely, dump all types of regions with right kernel > interface and fixed __next_mem_range separately ,then check whether > fixed__next_mem_range achieve desired purpose, see test patch segments > below or entire patch 0002 for more info It'd be better to include how you tested in the patch description. > fix patch 0001 is showed as follows > > From da2f3cafab9632d59261cf0801f62e909d0bfde1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: zijun_hu <zijun_hu@xxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 15:06:57 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] mm/memblock.c: fix index adjustment error in > __next_mem_range_rev() > > fix region index adjustment error when parameter type_b of > __next_mem_range_rev() == NULL > > Signed-off-by: zijun_hu <zijun_hu@xxxxxxx> Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>