Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 9 Jul 2018 14:49:54 +0900 | From | AKASHI Takahiro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v10 03/14] powerpc, kexec_file: factor out memblock-based arch_kexec_walk_mem() |
| |
James,
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 05:36:24PM +0100, James Morse wrote: > Hi Akashi, > > On 23/06/18 03:20, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > Memblock list is another source for usable system memory layout. > > A merged new arch_kexec_walk_mem() will walk through either io resource > > list or memblock list depending on CONFIG_ARCH_DISCARD_MEMBLOCK so that > > arm64, in addition to powerpc, will be able to utilize this generic > > function for kexec_file. > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/machine_kexec_file_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/machine_kexec_file_64.c > > index 0bd23dc789a4..3d4be91786ce 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/machine_kexec_file_64.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/machine_kexec_file_64.c > > Does this file still need its memblock.h include?
OK. Will remove it.
> > > diff --git a/kernel/kexec_file.c b/kernel/kexec_file.c > > index 63c7ce1c0c3e..563acd1c9a61 100644 > > --- a/kernel/kexec_file.c > > +++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c > > @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ > > #include <linux/file.h> > > #include <linux/slab.h> > > #include <linux/kexec.h> > > +#include <linux/memblock.h> > > #include <linux/mutex.h> > > #include <linux/list.h> > > #include <linux/fs.h> > > @@ -501,6 +502,53 @@ static int locate_mem_hole_callback(struct resource *res, void *arg) > > return locate_mem_hole_bottom_up(start, end, kbuf); > > } > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK) && !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_DISCARD_MEMBLOCK) > > The only caller is also guarded by these same ifdefs. Can't we remove this and > rely on the compilers dead-code elimination to remove this function when its not > needed?
I don't think we can remove this #ifdef. "for_each_free_mem_range[_reverse]()" is defined under CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK in memblock.h. If some architecture wants to support KEXEC_FILE but doesn't have HAVE_MEMBLOCK, compiling kexec_file.c will fail.
> > > +static int kexec_walk_memblock(struct kexec_buf *kbuf, > > + int (*func)(struct resource *, void *)) > > +{ > > + u64 i; > > + phys_addr_t mstart, mend; > > + struct resource res = { }; > > + int ret = 0; > > > Keeping this patch as 'just' moving code would avoid having to play > spot-the-difference:
OK. I will split this patch into two. But just "moving" is impossible because the function names will be duplicated in kexec_file.c.
> > + if (kbuf->image->type == KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH) > > + return func(&crashk_res, kbuf); > > This will be new for powerpc, but any attempt to use it should be caught by > arch_kexec_kernel_image_probe(), which has: > | /* We don't support crash kernels yet. */ > | if (image->type == KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH) > | return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > Looks good to me! For what its worth: > Acked-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Thank you for your reviews.
-Takahiro AKASHI
> > Thanks, > > James
| |