Hi all,
On 04/08/2013 05:56 PM, Lin Feng wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> index 474e28f..e2a7277 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> @@ -1318,6 +1318,8 @@ vmemmap_populate(struct page *start_page, unsigned long size, int node)
> if (!p)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + vmemmap_verify((pte_t *)p, node, addr, addr + PAGE_SIZE);
> +
> addr_end = addr + PAGE_SIZE;
> p_end = p + PAGE_SIZE;
> } else {
IIUC it seems that the original 'p_end = p + PAGE_SIZE' assignment is buggy, because:
1309 if (!cpu_has_pse) {
1310 next = (addr + PAGE_SIZE) & PAGE_MASK;
1311 pmd = vmemmap_pmd_populate(pud, addr, node);
1312
1313 if (!pmd)
1314 return -ENOMEM;
1315
1316 p = vmemmap_pte_populate(pmd, addr, node);
1317
1318 if (!p)
1319 return -ENOMEM;
1320
1321 addr_end = addr + PAGE_SIZE;
1322 p_end = p + PAGE_SIZE;
The return value of vmemmap_pte_populate() is the virtual address of pte, not the allocated
virtual address, which is different from vmemmap_alloc_block_buf() in cpu_has_pse case, so
the addition PAGE_SIZE in !cpu_has_pse case is nonsense.
Or am I missing something?
thanks,
linfeng
--
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>