[PATCH v2 03/25] mm: Fix bugs in region_is_ram()

[Dan Williams]

From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani at hp.com>

region_is_ram() looks up the iomem_resource table to check if
a target range is in RAM.  However, it always returns with -1
due to invalid range checks.  It always breaks the loop at the
first entry of the table.

Another issue is that it compares p->flags and flags, but it
always fails.  The flags is declared as int, which makes it as
a negative value with IORESOURCE_BUSY (0x80000000) set while
p->flags is unsigned long.

Fix the range check and flags so that region_is_ram() works as
advertised.

Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani at hp.com>
Cc: Mike Travis <travis at sgi.com>
Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof at suse.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams at intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams at intel.com>
---
 kernel/resource.c |    6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
index 90552aab5f2d..fed052a1bc9f 100644
--- a/kernel/resource.c
+++ b/kernel/resource.c
@@ -504,13 +504,13 @@ int region_is_ram(resource_size_t start, unsigned long size)
 {
 	struct resource *p;
 	resource_size_t end = start + size - 1;
-	int flags = IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_BUSY;
+	unsigned long flags = IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_BUSY;
 	const char *name = "System RAM";
 	int ret = -1;
 
 	read_lock(&resource_lock);
 	for (p = iomem_resource.child; p ; p = p->sibling) {
-		if (end < p->start)
+		if (p->end < start)
 			continue;
 
 		if (p->start <= start && end <= p->end) {
@@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ int region_is_ram(resource_size_t start, unsigned long size)
 				ret = 1;
 			break;
 		}
-		if (p->end < start)
+		if (end < p->start)
 			break;	/* not found */
 	}
 	read_unlock(&resource_lock);