On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 06:19:46PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 3:17 PM Wei Yang <richardw.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> memmap should be the physical address to page struct instead of virtual
>> address to pfn.
>>
>> Since we call this only for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, pfn_to_page() is valid at
>> this point.
>>
>> Fixes: ba72b4c8cf60 ("mm/sparsemem: support sub-section hotplug")
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> mm/sparse.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
>> index b5da121bdd6e..56816f653588 100644
>> --- a/mm/sparse.c
>> +++ b/mm/sparse.c
>> @@ -888,7 +888,7 @@ int __meminit sparse_add_section(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn,
>> /* Align memmap to section boundary in the subsection case */
>> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP) &&
>> section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr) != start_pfn)
>> - memmap = pfn_to_kaddr(section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr));
>> + memmap = pfn_to_page(section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr));
>
>Yes, this looks obviously correct. This might be tripping up
>makedumpfile. Do you see any practical effects of this bug? The kernel
>mostly avoids ->section_mem_map in the vmemmap case and in the
>!vmemmap case section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr) should always equal
>start_pfn.
To summarize:
* vmemmap, ->section_mem_map is not used mostly
* !vmemmap, we are sure range is section aligned
Sounds we don't need to handle this?
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
