On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:47:48AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > Le 23/09/2021 à 09:43, Mike Rapoport a écrit : > > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > For ages memblock_free() interface dealt with physical addresses even > > despite the existence of memblock_alloc_xx() functions that return a > > virtual pointer. > > > > Introduce memblock_phys_free() for freeing physical ranges and repurpose > > memblock_free() to free virtual pointers to make the following pairing > > abundantly clear: > > > > int memblock_phys_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size); > > phys_addr_t memblock_phys_alloc(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size); > > > > void *memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align); > > void memblock_free(void *ptr, size_t size); > > > > Replace intermediate memblock_free_ptr() with memblock_free() and drop > > unnecessary aliases memblock_free_early() and memblock_free_early_nid(). > > > > Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c > > index 1a04e5bdf655..37826d8c4f74 100644 > > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c > > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c > > @@ -723,7 +723,7 @@ void __init smp_save_dump_cpus(void) > > /* Get the CPU registers */ > > smp_save_cpu_regs(sa, addr, is_boot_cpu, page); > > } > > - memblock_free(page, PAGE_SIZE); > > + memblock_phys_free(page, PAGE_SIZE); > > diag_amode31_ops.diag308_reset(); > > pcpu_set_smt(0); > > } > > @@ -880,7 +880,7 @@ void __init smp_detect_cpus(void) > > /* Add CPUs present at boot */ > > __smp_rescan_cpus(info, true); > > - memblock_free_early((unsigned long)info, sizeof(*info)); > > + memblock_free(info, sizeof(*info)); > > } > > /* > > I'm a bit lost. IIUC memblock_free_early() and memblock_free() where > identical. Yes, they were, but all calls to memblock_free_early() were using __pa(vaddr) because they had a virtual address at hand. > In the first hunk memblock_free() gets replaced by memblock_phys_free() > In the second hunk memblock_free_early() gets replaced by memblock_free() In the first hunk the memory is allocated with memblock_phys_alloc() and we have a physical range to free. In the second hunk the memory is allocated with memblock_alloc() and we are freeing a virtual pointer. > I think it would be easier to follow if you could split it in several > patches: It was an explicit request from Linus to make it a single commit: but the actual commit can and should be just a single commit that just fixes 'memblock_free()' to have sane interfaces. I don't feel strongly about splitting it (except my laziness really objects), but I don't think doing the conversion in several steps worth the churn. > - First patch: Create memblock_phys_free() and change all relevant > memblock_free() to memblock_phys_free() - Or change memblock_free() to > memblock_phys_free() and make memblock_free() an alias of it. > - Second patch: Make memblock_free_ptr() become memblock_free() and change > all remaining callers to the new semantics (IIUC memblock_free(__pa(ptr)) > becomes memblock_free(ptr) and make memblock_free_ptr() an alias of > memblock_free() > - Fourth patch: Replace and drop memblock_free_ptr() > - Fifth patch: Drop memblock_free_early() and memblock_free_early_nid() (All > users should have been upgraded to memblock_free_phys() in patch 1 or > memblock_free() in patch 2) > > Christophe -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
