[PATCH v2 2/3] Generic handling of multi-page exclusions

[Atsushi Kumagai]

>From: Atsushi Kumagai <kumagai-atsushi at mxc.nes.nec.co.jp>
>Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/3] Generic handling of multi-page exclusions
>Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 04:18:31 +0000
>
>>>> At that time, I chose the current code since it was simpler and safer.
>>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/kexec%40lists.infradead.org/msg10207.html
>>>>
>>>> Don't you like this ?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Sorry. I had forgotten this. We should keep the sanity check
>>>there. But in our policy, we should not pass to set_bitmap_cyclic(),
>>>pfn and cycle where pfn is not in the cycle. We should chceck that in
>>>the caller side and pass pfn in the cycle only.
>>>
>>>Also, on the current implementation, even if pfn outside a current
>>>cycle is passed to set_bitmap_cyclic(), we don't have any means to
>>>know that.
>>>
>>>So, how about warning that only once at runtime?
>>
>> Sounds good, it will be helpful to detect bugs in caller side.
>> Like this?
>>
>> diff --git a/makedumpfile.c b/makedumpfile.c
>> index 75092a8..da960ad 100644
>> --- a/makedumpfile.c
>> +++ b/makedumpfile.c
>> @@ -3361,9 +3361,16 @@ int
>>  set_bitmap_cyclic(char *bitmap, unsigned long long pfn, int val, struct cycle *cycle)
>>  {
>>  	int byte, bit;
>> +	static int warning = 0;
>>
>> -        if (pfn < cycle->start_pfn || cycle->end_pfn <= pfn)
>> +        if (pfn < cycle->start_pfn || cycle->end_pfn <= pfn) {
>> +		if (!warning) {
>> +			MSG("WARNING: PFN out of cycle range. (pfn:%llx, ", pfn);
>> +			MSG("cycle:[%llx-%llx])\n", cycle->start_pfn, cycle->end_pfn);
>> +			warning = 1;
>> +		}
>>                  return FALSE;
>> +	}
>>
>>  	/*
>>  	 * If val is 0, clear bit on the bitmap.
>>
>
>Yes, I thought this logic.

Thanks, I've pushed this into devel branch.

Atsushi Kumagai