arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid())

Kefeng Wang wangkefeng.wang at huawei.com
Thu Apr 29 01:48:26 BST 2021


On 2021/4/28 13:59, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 07:08:59PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>> On 2021/4/27 14:23, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:26:38PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2021/4/26 13:20, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 03:51:56PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>>>>> On 2021/4/25 15:19, Mike Rapoport wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 04:11:16PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            I tested this patchset(plus arm32 change, like arm64 does)
>>>>>>            based on lts 5.10,add some debug log, the useful info shows
>>>>>>            below, if we enable HOLES_IN_ZONE, no panic, any idea,
>>>>>>            thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        Are there any changes on top of 5.10 except for pfn_valid() patch?
>>>>>>        Do you see this panic on 5.10 without the changes?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, there are some BSP support for arm board based on 5.10,
>>> Is it possible to test 5.12?
> Do you use SPARSMEM? If yes, what is your section size?
> What is the value if CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER in your configuration?

Yes,

CONFIG_SPARSEMEM=y

CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_STATIC=y

CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER = 11

CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=0xC0000000
CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID=y
CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y
#define SECTION_SIZE_BITS    26
#define MAX_PHYSADDR_BITS    32
#define MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS     32


>



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list