On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:20:59PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> Something like the following should fix it.
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
>> index 32a0a5e..2770970 100644
>> --- a/mm/memblock.c
>> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
>> @@ -148,11 +148,15 @@ phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_in_range(phys_addr_t start,
>> */
>> int __init_memblock memblock_free_reserved_regions(void)
>> {
>> +#ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
>> if (memblock.reserved.regions == memblock_reserved_init_regions)
>> return 0;
>>
>> return memblock_free(__pa(memblock.reserved.regions),
>> sizeof(struct memblock_region) * memblock.reserved.max);
>> +#else
>> + return 0;
>> +#endif
>
> BTW, this is just ugly and I don't think we're saving any noticeable
> amount by doing this "free - give it to page allocator - reserve
> again" dancing. We should just allocate regions aligned to page
> boundaries and free them later when memblock is no longer in use.
if it is that case, that change could fix other problem problem too.
--- during the one free reserved.regions could double the array.
please check attached patch.
Yinghai
Attachment:
fix_free_memblock_reserve_v4.patch
Description: Binary data