On Mon, 4 Dec 2017 21:48:04 +0800 zhong jiang <zhongjiang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Currently, init_pages_in_zone walk the zone in pageblock_nr_pages
> steps. MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES is possible to have holes when
> CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE is set. it is likely to be different between
> MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES and pageblock_nr_pages. if we skip the size of
> MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES, it will result in the second 2M memroy leak.
>
> meanwhile, the change will make the code consistent. because the
> entire function is based on the pageblock_nr_pages steps.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/page_owner.c
> +++ b/mm/page_owner.c
> @@ -527,7 +527,7 @@ static void init_pages_in_zone(pg_data_t *pgdat, struct zone *zone)
> */
> for (; pfn < end_pfn; ) {
> if (!pfn_valid(pfn)) {
> - pfn = ALIGN(pfn + 1, MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES);
> + pfn = ALIGN(pfn + 1, pageblock_nr_pages);
> continue;
> }
I *think* Michal and Vlastimil will be OK with this as-newly-presented.
Guys, can you please have another think?
--
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>
