[PATCH] makedumpfile: Fix a bug found during regression testing for v1.5.6

[Atsushi Kumagai]

>On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 08:33:19 +0000
>Atsushi Kumagai <kumagai-atsushi at mxc.nes.nec.co.jp> wrote:
>
>> >> From: Atsushi Kumagai <kumagai-atsushi at mxc.nes.nec.co.jp>
>> >> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:56:01 +0900
>> >> Subject: [PATCH] Exclude small cycle regions wrongly.
>> >>
>> >> In bitmap initialization, if a cycle region is smaller than 8 pages
>> >> and its start_pfn is aligned to multiple of 8 pages, it will be
>> >> excluded wrongly.
>> >>
>> >>   Example case:
>> >>     pfn_start=0x103ff80, pfn_start_roundup=0x103ff80
>> >>     pfn_end=0x103ff84, pfn_end_round=0x103ff80
>> >>
>> >> This case doesn't meet any conditions to set bits in
>> >> create_1st_bitmap_cyclic() and initialize_2nd_bitmap_cyclic().
>> >> We should admit the case where pfn_start is equal to pfn_end_round
>> >> like above.
>> >
>> >Hello Kumagai-san,
>> >
>> >FWIW I cleaned up these bit operations in makedumpfile, completely
>> >removing this code and instead adding functions for efficient setting
>> >and clearing of a range of bits in a bitmap:
>> >
>> >set_bits(char *buf, size_t start, size_t end);
>> >clear_bits(char *buf, size_t start, size_t end);
>> >
>> >The whole branch is still sitting on my disk, because I based it on
>> >my other patch series (generic handling of multi-page exclusions), and
>> >there were quite some conflicts when I tried to rebase it on devel.
>> >
>> >But if you include it in v1.5.6, I will do the rebase nevertheless,
>> >so it doesn't have to wait for your decision about the other series.
>> >
>> >Can we do it that way?
>>
>> Yes. If you can rebase your local branch on the current devel branch,
>> reviewing them for v1.5.7 will go on smoothly.
>
>Hm, I'm not sure I know what to do. So, let me make a summary of my
>local makedumpfile branches:
>
>1. pfn_t: introduce the mdf_pfn_t type
>2. cycle_align: make cycle alignment unnecessary

Is this "generic handling of multi-page exclusions"?

>3. bitmap_ops: helpers to set/clear range of bits (not yet sent)
>4. hugepage: handling of compound pages (not yet sent)
>
>Most branches are independent, (except hugepage depends on
>cycle_align), but since they often change the same lines of code, I
>must send them in some order, or they won't apply cleanly.
>
>Now, do I understand you correctly that you want me to postpone all of
>them _AFTER_ v1.5.6 is released?

Anyway, you're right. I want to merge these 4 sets into v1.5.7.


Thanks
Atsushi Kumagai