[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 2.6.18-rc6-mm2: fix for error compiling ppc/mm/init.c
    On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

    >> Because in the -mm kernel the patches were rolled against, ZONE_DMA was
    >> optional and MAX_NR_ZONES could change which led to this confusion. It is
    >> wrong and thanks for catching it. However, this is a a fairly small part
    >> of the whole patch, is it an exaggeration to call the whole patch broken?
    > Well, that and the partially uninitialized array, that comprises most of
    > the ppc patch :)

    ok, that's a fair enough point :) .

    > I wasn't talking about the other patches forming your
    > patch set, mostly the whole PPC... the lack of usage of symbolic
    > constants looked pretty bad to me

    Once we have a patch using symbolic names working on ppc, I'll make a
    patch that uses symbolic names on the other architectures and post it.

    >, I didn't know there were those other
    > -mm related constraints.
    >> On a semi-related (but not very important) note, why does PPC use ZONE_DMA
    >> as it's lowest zone and not ZONE_NORMAL? I currently view zones as
    >> meaning;
    > History... A lot of driver used to request memory in ZONE_DMA "just in
    > case" (the SCSI subsystem for example). Not having one meant that those
    > drivers or subsystem would just not work on powerpc. I don't know if
    > they have all been fixed, but if that's the case, then we can move
    > everything to ZONE_NORMAL.

    I don't know if it has been fixed either.

    >> ZONE_DMA32 - The physical range of memory usable by 32 bit devices on 64
    >> bit platforms. It is mapped into the kernel virtual address space
    > We haven't done a ZONE_DMA32 for now. Currently, all supported 64 bits
    > implementations have an iommu that makes this unnecessary, though the
    > thread of having to deal with an implementation without one is getting
    > more and more precise, so we may have to add it.
    >> This is not 100% bullet-proof definition. For example, memmap can be
    >> allocated from highmem and placed in the kernel virtual address space. But
    >> by the definitions above, ppc would have no ZONE_DMA, only ZONE_NORMAL and
    >> ZONE_HIGHMEM. Was ZONE_DMA used for any particular reason?
    > As explained above. Is that a problem ?

    No, it's not. It was out of curiousity more than anything else. I need to
    update my definition of ZONE_DMA slightly, that's all.

    >> By the PFN list, I assume you mean the dmesg entry that starts with "Zone
    >> PFN ranges:". If that is messed up, it is bad, but it should still boot
    >> albeit with memory in the wrong zones.
    > It was messed up with ZONE_DMA 0 -> xxx where xxx was my actual max_pfn,
    > and ZONE_NORMAL from xxx -> yyy where yyy was a random very big number.
    > That was with CONFIG_HIGHMEM off and it did boot. It didn't with
    > CONFIG_HIGHMEM on as the high memory was being put in ZONE_NORMAL and
    > ZONE_HIGHMEM left uninitialized.

    ok, the problem is pretty clear at least.

    >>> I've about to run some tests with this patch.
    >> I made a minor comment on your patch below.
    >>> Looks like we need give a
    >>> closer look at those patches, in case that breakage appears on other
    >>> archs as well (or similar).
    >> I looked through the other patches for similar breakage. On x86,
    >> max_zone_pfns is initialised as;
    >> # x86 init
    >> + unsigned long max_zone_pfns[MAX_NR_ZONES] = {
    >> + virt_to_phys((char *)MAX_DMA_ADDRESS) >> PAGE_SHIFT,
    >> + max_low_pfn,
    >> + highend_pfn
    >> + };
    >> as it does not have ZONE_DMA32, I believe it's ok. On x86_64, I used
    > I would much prefer to use explicit array index initializers... but ok.

    Once we get ppc sorted, I'll make a patch that uses explicit array
    initialisation and symbolic index names on the other arches.

    >> # x86_64 init
    >> + unsigned long max_zone_pfns[MAX_NR_ZONES] = {MAX_DMA_PFN,
    >> + MAX_DMA32_PFN,
    >> + end_pfn};
    >> This should be ok because x86_64 uses ZONE_NORMAL as the highest zone.
    > Same comment.
    >> On ia64, there is
    >> # ia64
    >> + max_zone_pfns[ZONE_DMA] = max_dma;
    >> + max_zone_pfns[ZONE_NORMAL] = max_low_pfn;
    >> That should also be ok because it doesn't use HIGHMEM.
    >> How do they look to you?
    > I suppose they are ok. I dislike this CONFIG_* variation of the
    > definition of the ZONE_* constants, it's error prone though.

    I believe it was to stop having more empty zones than was really
    necessary. It was a saving on NUMA. I might be wrong, I'll need to check
    the archives again.

    >>> ---
    >>> New zone initialisation on powerpc is broken, especially with
    >>> CONFIG_HIGHMEM, this fixes it by initializing the array to 0 and filling
    >>> up the right entries.
    >>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>
    >>> Index: linux-work/arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c
    >>> ===================================================================
    >>> --- linux-work.orig/arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c 2006-10-03 12:41:03.000000000 +1000
    >>> +++ linux-work/arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c 2006-10-03 14:08:30.000000000 +1000
    >>> @@ -307,11 +307,12 @@ void __init paging_init(void)
    >>> top_of_ram, total_ram);
    >>> printk(KERN_DEBUG "Memory hole size: %ldMB\n",
    >>> (top_of_ram - total_ram) >> 20);
    >>> + memset(max_zone_pfns, 0, sizeof(max_zone_pfns));
    >>> #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM
    >>> - max_zone_pfns[0] = total_lowmem >> PAGE_SHIFT;
    >>> - max_zone_pfns[1] = top_of_ram >> PAGE_SHIFT;
    >>> + max_zone_pfns[ZONE_DMA] = total_lowmem >> PAGE_SHIFT;
    >> Add
    >> max_zone_pfns[ZONE_NORMAL] = total_lowmem >> PAGE_SHIFT;
    >> The effect will be that ZONE_NORMAL will be initialised as empty.
    > Ok, but what happens with the patch code where it's 0 ?

    Ah (wipes egg off face). In free_area_init_nodes(), it will be set to
    (total_lowmem >> PAGE_SHIFT) by this;

    + arch_zone_lowest_possible_pfn[i] =
    + arch_zone_highest_possible_pfn[i-1];
    + arch_zone_highest_possible_pfn[i] =
    + max(max_zone_pfn[i], arch_zone_lowest_possible_pfn[i]);

    so you can leave it as 0.

    > I much prefer,
    > in general, initializing an array to 0, and then only fill the entries
    > that matter. This avoids the problem of the ZONE_* constants floating
    > around (or adding a new one or whatever). It might make sense to have
    > the generic code handle that instead...

    You're right. The generic code does handle this case because at one point,
    I remembered clearly that not all zones would be in use :/

    Mel Gorman
    Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
    University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-10-03 11:37    [W:0.036 / U:1.852 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site