Physical memory start contraints in the Linux kernel (Was: Re: Xen osstest on Calxeda midway progress (Was: Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 21486: tolerable FAIL - PUSHED))
Russell King - ARM Linux
linux at arm.linux.org.uk
Tue Nov 12 10:39:04 EST 2013
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 04:24:46PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> On 11/12/2013 02:20 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
> > index f52150d2ec00..1957d54198ad 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c
> > @@ -660,6 +660,17 @@ int __init arm_add_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
> > }
> > #endif
> >
> > + if (aligned_start < PHYS_OFFSET) {
> > + if (aligned_start + size < PHYS_OFFSET) {
>
> just a note I sent to Russell. Here should be "<=" instead of just "<"
>
> > + pr_info("Ignoring memory below PHYS_OFFSET: 0x%08llx-0x%08llx\n",
> > + aligned_start, aligned_start + size);
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + size -= PHYS_OFFSET - aligned_start;
> > + aligned_start = PHYS_OFFSET;
>
> We should printk a message here to be aware that alignment was done.
Yep, you sent me an updated patch, I haven't added anything to my
kernel tree for about a week and a bit now as I want to get what's
already there into Linus' tree. Once that stuff has gone, I'll see
about adding some of these fixes we need into the queue.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list