-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On ??????????? 25 ??????? 2007, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> The patch looks good, but the changelog does not. First, AFAICT, the
> x86_64 code doesn't touch anything outside the e820 map. Why do you think
> it does?
>
the following code:
paddr = round_down(e820.map[0].addr + e820.map[0].size, PAGE_SIZE);
for (i = 1; i < e820.nr_map; i++) {
struct e820entry *ei = &e820.map[i];
if (paddr < ei->addr)
e820_mark_nosave_range(paddr,
round_up(ei->addr, PAGE_SIZE));
obviously will mark region *between* two e820 regions if they are not
adjacent. I do not say that it is wrong (I have no idea); but exactly because
I have no idea I tried to avoid it.
> Second, it is not true that the region in question is at 0xee00 on x86_64.
> At least on my box it's above the end of RAM.
>
On my box the problem region starts at ee800 :) But you are right, it does not
belong here.
> I think the x86_64 version is correct too.
>
I do not say it is not. I just say that it does something I cannot verify so I
better avoid it (i.e. I better change existing behaviour as little as
possible).
- -andrey
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF40SjR6LMutpd94wRAlLvAKCMkVxMkKNwpGX/J3on0jQS659+zgCgmofK
vuG4p3gR4yBjfoHuMAR0cDU=
=JG9z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
