Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:21:03 +0800 | | From | Amerigo Wang <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/4] kcore: remove noise from walk_memory_resource |
| |
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 02:12:27PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: >From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> > >Originally, walk_memory_resource() was introduced to traverse all memory >of "System RAM" for detecting memory hotplug/unplug range. >For doing so, flags of IORESOUCE_MEM|IORESOURCE_BUSY was used and this >was enough for memory hotplug because scanning range was controlled properly. > >But for using other purpose, /proc/kcore, this may includes some firmware >area marked as IORESOURCE_BUSY | IORESOUCE_MEM. This patch makes the check >strict to find out busy "System RAM". > >Note: PPC64 keeps their own walk_memory_resouce(), which walk through >ppc64's lmb informaton. Because old kclist_add() is called per lmb, >this patch makes no difference in behavior, finally. > >Changelog v2: > - new patch from v2. > >Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> >--- > kernel/resource.c | 18 ++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > >Index: mmotm-2.6.31-Jul16/kernel/resource.c >=================================================================== >--- mmotm-2.6.31-Jul16.orig/kernel/resource.c >+++ mmotm-2.6.31-Jul16/kernel/resource.c >@@ -237,10 +237,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(release_resource); > #if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_WALK_MEMORY) > /* > * Finds the lowest memory reosurce exists within [res->start.res->end) >- * the caller must specify res->start, res->end, res->flags. >+ * the caller must specify res->start, res->end, res->flags and "name". > * If found, returns 0, res is overwritten, if not found, returns -1. > */ >-static int find_next_system_ram(struct resource *res) >+static int find_next_system_ram(struct resource *res, char *name) > { > resource_size_t start, end; > struct resource *p; >@@ -256,6 +256,8 @@ static int find_next_system_ram(struct r > /* system ram is just marked as IORESOURCE_MEM */ > if (p->flags != res->flags) > continue; >+ if (name && strcmp(p->name, name)) >+ continue; > if (p->start > end) { > p = NULL; > break; >@@ -273,19 +275,27 @@ static int find_next_system_ram(struct r > res->end = p->end; > return 0; > } >+ >+/* >+ * This function calls callback against all memory range of "System RAM" >+ * which are marked as IORESOURCE_MEM and IORESOUCE_BUSY. >+ * Now, this function is only for "System RAM".
Then we should change its name, shouldn't we? :)
>+ */ > int > walk_memory_resource(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages, void *arg, >- int (*func)(unsigned long, unsigned long, void *)) >+ int (*func)(unsigned long, unsigned long, void *))
This line is a trivial change, I don't want to see it mixed with the rest...
> { > struct resource res; > unsigned long pfn, len; > u64 orig_end; > int ret = -1; >+ > res.start = (u64) start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT; > res.end = ((u64)(start_pfn + nr_pages) << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1; > res.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_BUSY; > orig_end = res.end; >- while ((res.start < res.end) && (find_next_system_ram(&res) >= 0)) { >+ while ((res.start < res.end) && >+ (find_next_system_ram(&res, "System RAM") >= 0)) { > pfn = (unsigned long)(res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT); > len = (unsigned long)((res.end + 1 - res.start) >> PAGE_SHIFT); > ret = (*func)(pfn, len, arg); > >-- >To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in >the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |