2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Procedures for maintaining information about logical memory blocks.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Peter Bergner, IBM Corp. June 2001.
|
|
|
|
* Copyright (C) 2001 Peter Bergner.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
|
|
|
|
* modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
|
|
|
|
* as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version
|
|
|
|
* 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/kernel.h>
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/slab.h>
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/init.h>
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/bitops.h>
|
2010-07-07 05:39:07 +07:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/poison.h>
|
2010-07-07 05:39:16 +07:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/pfn.h>
|
2010-07-07 05:39:19 +07:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/debugfs.h>
|
|
|
|
#include <linux/seq_file.h>
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/memblock.h>
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
struct memblock memblock __initdata_memblock;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
int memblock_debug __initdata_memblock;
|
|
|
|
int memblock_can_resize __initdata_memblock;
|
|
|
|
static struct memblock_region memblock_memory_init_regions[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1] __initdata_memblock;
|
|
|
|
static struct memblock_region memblock_reserved_init_regions[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS + 1] __initdata_memblock;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
/* inline so we don't get a warning when pr_debug is compiled out */
|
|
|
|
static inline const char *memblock_type_name(struct memblock_type *type)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (type == &memblock.memory)
|
|
|
|
return "memory";
|
|
|
|
else if (type == &memblock.reserved)
|
|
|
|
return "reserved";
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
return "unknown";
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Address comparison utilities
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_align_down(phys_addr_t addr, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
return addr & ~(size - 1);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_align_up(phys_addr_t addr, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
return (addr + (size - 1)) & ~(size - 1);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
static unsigned long __init_memblock memblock_addrs_overlap(phys_addr_t base1, phys_addr_t size1,
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t base2, phys_addr_t size2)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return ((base1 < (base2 + size2)) && (base2 < (base1 + size1)));
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
long __init_memblock memblock_overlaps_region(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
unsigned long i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < type->cnt; i++) {
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t rgnbase = type->regions[i].base;
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t rgnsize = type->regions[i].size;
|
|
|
|
if (memblock_addrs_overlap(base, size, rgnbase, rgnsize))
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return (i < type->cnt) ? i : -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Find, allocate, deallocate or reserve unreserved regions. All allocations
|
|
|
|
* are top-down.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
2010-10-12 02:34:09 +07:00
|
|
|
static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_region(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end,
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t base, res_base;
|
|
|
|
long j;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-10-05 04:57:39 +07:00
|
|
|
/* In case, huge size is requested */
|
|
|
|
if (end < size)
|
|
|
|
return MEMBLOCK_ERROR;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
base = memblock_align_down((end - size), align);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:25:10 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Prevent allocations returning 0 as it's also used to
|
|
|
|
* indicate an allocation failure
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (start == 0)
|
|
|
|
start = PAGE_SIZE;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
while (start <= base) {
|
|
|
|
j = memblock_overlaps_region(&memblock.reserved, base, size);
|
|
|
|
if (j < 0)
|
|
|
|
return base;
|
|
|
|
res_base = memblock.reserved.regions[j].base;
|
|
|
|
if (res_base < size)
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
base = memblock_align_down(res_base - size, align);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return MEMBLOCK_ERROR;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-09-16 03:05:29 +07:00
|
|
|
static phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_base(phys_addr_t size,
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
long i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUG_ON(0 == size);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Pump up max_addr */
|
2010-07-12 12:00:34 +07:00
|
|
|
if (end == MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE)
|
|
|
|
end = memblock.current_limit;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* We do a top-down search, this tends to limit memory
|
|
|
|
* fragmentation by keeping early boot allocs near the
|
|
|
|
* top of memory
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
for (i = memblock.memory.cnt - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t memblockbase = memblock.memory.regions[i].base;
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t memblocksize = memblock.memory.regions[i].size;
|
2010-07-12 12:00:34 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t bottom, top, found;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (memblocksize < size)
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
2010-07-12 12:00:34 +07:00
|
|
|
if ((memblockbase + memblocksize) <= start)
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
bottom = max(memblockbase, start);
|
|
|
|
top = min(memblockbase + memblocksize, end);
|
|
|
|
if (bottom >= top)
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
found = memblock_find_region(bottom, top, size, align);
|
|
|
|
if (found != MEMBLOCK_ERROR)
|
|
|
|
return found;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return MEMBLOCK_ERROR;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:38:40 +07:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Find a free area with specified alignment in a specific range.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
u64 __init_memblock memblock_find_in_range(u64 start, u64 end, u64 size, u64 align)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return memblock_find_base(size, align, start, end);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-26 03:39:14 +07:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Free memblock.reserved.regions
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
int __init_memblock memblock_free_reserved_regions(void)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (memblock.reserved.regions == memblock_reserved_init_regions)
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return memblock_free(__pa(memblock.reserved.regions),
|
|
|
|
sizeof(struct memblock_region) * memblock.reserved.max);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Reserve memblock.reserved.regions
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
int __init_memblock memblock_reserve_reserved_regions(void)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (memblock.reserved.regions == memblock_reserved_init_regions)
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return memblock_reserve(__pa(memblock.reserved.regions),
|
|
|
|
sizeof(struct memblock_region) * memblock.reserved.max);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
static void __init_memblock memblock_remove_region(struct memblock_type *type, unsigned long r)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
unsigned long i;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
for (i = r; i < type->cnt - 1; i++) {
|
|
|
|
type->regions[i].base = type->regions[i + 1].base;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[i].size = type->regions[i + 1].size;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
type->cnt--;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Special case for empty arrays */
|
|
|
|
if (type->cnt == 0) {
|
|
|
|
type->cnt = 1;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[0].base = 0;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[0].size = 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Defined below but needed now */
|
|
|
|
static long memblock_add_region(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
static int __init_memblock memblock_double_array(struct memblock_type *type)
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct memblock_region *new_array, *old_array;
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t old_size, new_size, addr;
|
|
|
|
int use_slab = slab_is_available();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* We don't allow resizing until we know about the reserved regions
|
|
|
|
* of memory that aren't suitable for allocation
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (!memblock_can_resize)
|
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Calculate new doubled size */
|
|
|
|
old_size = type->max * sizeof(struct memblock_region);
|
|
|
|
new_size = old_size << 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Try to find some space for it.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* WARNING: We assume that either slab_is_available() and we use it or
|
|
|
|
* we use MEMBLOCK for allocations. That means that this is unsafe to use
|
|
|
|
* when bootmem is currently active (unless bootmem itself is implemented
|
|
|
|
* on top of MEMBLOCK which isn't the case yet)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* This should however not be an issue for now, as we currently only
|
|
|
|
* call into MEMBLOCK while it's still active, or much later when slab is
|
|
|
|
* active for memory hotplug operations
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (use_slab) {
|
|
|
|
new_array = kmalloc(new_size, GFP_KERNEL);
|
|
|
|
addr = new_array == NULL ? MEMBLOCK_ERROR : __pa(new_array);
|
|
|
|
} else
|
2010-07-12 12:00:34 +07:00
|
|
|
addr = memblock_find_base(new_size, sizeof(phys_addr_t), 0, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE);
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
if (addr == MEMBLOCK_ERROR) {
|
|
|
|
pr_err("memblock: Failed to double %s array from %ld to %ld entries !\n",
|
|
|
|
memblock_type_name(type), type->max, type->max * 2);
|
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
new_array = __va(addr);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:13:22 +07:00
|
|
|
memblock_dbg("memblock: %s array is doubled to %ld at [%#010llx-%#010llx]",
|
|
|
|
memblock_type_name(type), type->max * 2, (u64)addr, (u64)addr + new_size - 1);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Found space, we now need to move the array over before
|
|
|
|
* we add the reserved region since it may be our reserved
|
|
|
|
* array itself that is full.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
memcpy(new_array, type->regions, old_size);
|
|
|
|
memset(new_array + type->max, 0, old_size);
|
|
|
|
old_array = type->regions;
|
|
|
|
type->regions = new_array;
|
|
|
|
type->max <<= 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* If we use SLAB that's it, we are done */
|
|
|
|
if (use_slab)
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Add the new reserved region now. Should not fail ! */
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
BUG_ON(memblock_add_region(&memblock.reserved, addr, new_size));
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* If the array wasn't our static init one, then free it. We only do
|
|
|
|
* that before SLAB is available as later on, we don't know whether
|
|
|
|
* to use kfree or free_bootmem_pages(). Shouldn't be a big deal
|
|
|
|
* anyways
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (old_array != memblock_memory_init_regions &&
|
|
|
|
old_array != memblock_reserved_init_regions)
|
|
|
|
memblock_free(__pa(old_array), old_size);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
extern int __init_memblock __weak memblock_memory_can_coalesce(phys_addr_t addr1, phys_addr_t size1,
|
2010-07-07 05:39:14 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t addr2, phys_addr_t size2)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
static long __init_memblock memblock_add_region(struct memblock_type *type,
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t end = base + size;
|
|
|
|
int i, slot = -1;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* First try and coalesce this MEMBLOCK with others */
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < type->cnt; i++) {
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
struct memblock_region *rgn = &type->regions[i];
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t rend = rgn->base + rgn->size;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Exit if there's no possible hits */
|
|
|
|
if (rgn->base > end || rgn->size == 0)
|
|
|
|
break;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Check if we are fully enclosed within an existing
|
|
|
|
* block
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (rgn->base <= base && rend >= end)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Check if we overlap or are adjacent with the bottom
|
|
|
|
* of a block.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (base < rgn->base && end >= rgn->base) {
|
|
|
|
/* If we can't coalesce, create a new block */
|
|
|
|
if (!memblock_memory_can_coalesce(base, size,
|
|
|
|
rgn->base,
|
|
|
|
rgn->size)) {
|
|
|
|
/* Overlap & can't coalesce are mutually
|
|
|
|
* exclusive, if you do that, be prepared
|
|
|
|
* for trouble
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
WARN_ON(end != rgn->base);
|
|
|
|
goto new_block;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/* We extend the bottom of the block down to our
|
|
|
|
* base
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
rgn->base = base;
|
|
|
|
rgn->size = rend - base;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Return if we have nothing else to allocate
|
|
|
|
* (fully coalesced)
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (rend >= end)
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* We continue processing from the end of the
|
|
|
|
* coalesced block.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
base = rend;
|
|
|
|
size = end - base;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Now check if we overlap or are adjacent with the
|
|
|
|
* top of a block
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (base <= rend && end >= rend) {
|
|
|
|
/* If we can't coalesce, create a new block */
|
|
|
|
if (!memblock_memory_can_coalesce(rgn->base,
|
|
|
|
rgn->size,
|
|
|
|
base, size)) {
|
|
|
|
/* Overlap & can't coalesce are mutually
|
|
|
|
* exclusive, if you do that, be prepared
|
|
|
|
* for trouble
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
WARN_ON(rend != base);
|
|
|
|
goto new_block;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/* We adjust our base down to enclose the
|
|
|
|
* original block and destroy it. It will be
|
|
|
|
* part of our new allocation. Since we've
|
|
|
|
* freed an entry, we know we won't fail
|
|
|
|
* to allocate one later, so we won't risk
|
|
|
|
* losing the original block allocation.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
size += (base - rgn->base);
|
|
|
|
base = rgn->base;
|
|
|
|
memblock_remove_region(type, i--);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* If the array is empty, special case, replace the fake
|
|
|
|
* filler region and return
|
2010-07-07 05:39:14 +07:00
|
|
|
*/
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
if ((type->cnt == 1) && (type->regions[0].size == 0)) {
|
|
|
|
type->regions[0].base = base;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[0].size = size;
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
new_block:
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
/* If we are out of space, we fail. It's too late to resize the array
|
|
|
|
* but then this shouldn't have happened in the first place.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (WARN_ON(type->cnt >= type->max))
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Couldn't coalesce the MEMBLOCK, so add it to the sorted table. */
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
for (i = type->cnt - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
|
|
|
|
if (base < type->regions[i].base) {
|
|
|
|
type->regions[i+1].base = type->regions[i].base;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[i+1].size = type->regions[i].size;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
type->regions[i+1].base = base;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[i+1].size = size;
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
slot = i + 1;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
if (base < type->regions[0].base) {
|
|
|
|
type->regions[0].base = base;
|
|
|
|
type->regions[0].size = size;
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
slot = 0;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
type->cnt++;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
/* The array is full ? Try to resize it. If that fails, we undo
|
|
|
|
* our allocation and return an error
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (type->cnt == type->max && memblock_double_array(type)) {
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
BUG_ON(slot < 0);
|
|
|
|
memblock_remove_region(type, slot);
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
long __init_memblock memblock_add(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock_add_region(&memblock.memory, base, size);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
static long __init_memblock __memblock_remove(struct memblock_type *type,
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t end = base + size;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Walk through the array for collisions */
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < type->cnt; i++) {
|
|
|
|
struct memblock_region *rgn = &type->regions[i];
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t rend = rgn->base + rgn->size;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Nothing more to do, exit */
|
|
|
|
if (rgn->base > end || rgn->size == 0)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* If we fully enclose the block, drop it */
|
|
|
|
if (base <= rgn->base && end >= rend) {
|
|
|
|
memblock_remove_region(type, i--);
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* If we are fully enclosed within a block
|
|
|
|
* then we need to split it and we are done
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (base > rgn->base && end < rend) {
|
|
|
|
rgn->size = base - rgn->base;
|
|
|
|
if (!memblock_add_region(type, end, rend - end))
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
/* Failure to split is bad, we at least
|
|
|
|
* restore the block before erroring
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
rgn->size = rend - rgn->base;
|
|
|
|
WARN_ON(1);
|
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Check if we need to trim the bottom of a block */
|
|
|
|
if (rgn->base < end && rend > end) {
|
|
|
|
rgn->size -= end - rgn->base;
|
|
|
|
rgn->base = end;
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
/* And check if we need to trim the top of a block */
|
|
|
|
if (base < rend)
|
|
|
|
rgn->size -= rend - base;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
long __init_memblock memblock_remove(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return __memblock_remove(&memblock.memory, base, size);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-09-16 03:05:29 +07:00
|
|
|
long __init_memblock memblock_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return __memblock_remove(&memblock.reserved, base, size);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-09-16 03:05:29 +07:00
|
|
|
long __init_memblock memblock_reserve(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
struct memblock_type *_rgn = &memblock.reserved;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUG_ON(0 == size);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return memblock_add_region(_rgn, base, size);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init __memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t found;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
/* We align the size to limit fragmentation. Without this, a lot of
|
|
|
|
* small allocs quickly eat up the whole reserve array on sparc
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
size = memblock_align_up(size, align);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 12:00:34 +07:00
|
|
|
found = memblock_find_base(size, align, 0, max_addr);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
if (found != MEMBLOCK_ERROR &&
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
!memblock_add_region(&memblock.reserved, found, size))
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
return found;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_base(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t max_addr)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t alloc;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
alloc = __memblock_alloc_base(size, align, max_addr);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (alloc == 0)
|
|
|
|
panic("ERROR: Failed to allocate 0x%llx bytes below 0x%llx.\n",
|
|
|
|
(unsigned long long) size, (unsigned long long) max_addr);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return alloc;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock_alloc_base(size, align, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Additional node-local allocators. Search for node memory is bottom up
|
|
|
|
* and walks memblock regions within that node bottom-up as well, but allocation
|
2010-07-07 05:39:16 +07:00
|
|
|
* within an memblock region is top-down. XXX I plan to fix that at some stage
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* WARNING: Only available after early_node_map[] has been populated,
|
|
|
|
* on some architectures, that is after all the calls to add_active_range()
|
|
|
|
* have been done to populate it.
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __weak __init memblock_nid_range(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t end, int *nid)
|
2010-07-07 05:38:59 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-07 05:39:16 +07:00
|
|
|
#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_POPULATES_NODE_MAP
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* This code originates from sparc which really wants use to walk by addresses
|
|
|
|
* and returns the nid. This is not very convenient for early_pfn_map[] users
|
|
|
|
* as the map isn't sorted yet, and it really wants to be walked by nid.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* For now, I implement the inefficient method below which walks the early
|
|
|
|
* map multiple times. Eventually we may want to use an ARCH config option
|
|
|
|
* to implement a completely different method for both case.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
|
|
|
|
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUMNODES; i++) {
|
|
|
|
get_pfn_range_for_nid(i, &start_pfn, &end_pfn);
|
|
|
|
if (start < PFN_PHYS(start_pfn) || start >= PFN_PHYS(end_pfn))
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
*nid = i;
|
|
|
|
return min(end, PFN_PHYS(end_pfn));
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
2010-07-07 05:38:59 +07:00
|
|
|
*nid = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return end;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
static phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_nid_region(struct memblock_region *mp,
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t size,
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t align, int nid)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t start, end;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
start = mp->base;
|
|
|
|
end = start + mp->size;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
start = memblock_align_up(start, align);
|
|
|
|
while (start < end) {
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t this_end;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
int this_nid;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:38:58 +07:00
|
|
|
this_end = memblock_nid_range(start, end, &this_nid);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
if (this_nid == nid) {
|
2010-07-12 10:28:15 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t ret = memblock_find_region(start, this_end, size, align);
|
2010-07-07 05:39:09 +07:00
|
|
|
if (ret != MEMBLOCK_ERROR &&
|
mm/memblock: properly handle overlaps and fix error path
Currently memblock_reserve() or memblock_free() don't handle overlaps of
any kind. There is some special casing for coalescing exactly adjacent
regions but that's about it.
This is annoying because typically memblock_reserve() is used to mark
regions passed by the firmware as reserved and we all know how much we can
trust our firmwares...
Also, with the current code, if we do something it doesn't handle right
such as trying to memblock_reserve() a large range spanning multiple
existing smaller reserved regions for example, or doing overlapping
reservations, it can silently corrupt the internal region array, causing
odd errors much later on, such as allocations returning reserved regions
etc...
This patch rewrites the underlying functions that add or remove a region
to the arrays. The new code is a lot more robust as it fully handles
overlapping regions. It's also, imho, simpler than the previous
implementation.
In addition, while doing so, I found a bug where if we fail to double the
array while adding a region, we would remove the last region of the array
rather than the region we just allocated. This fixes it too.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2011-03-23 06:33:43 +07:00
|
|
|
!memblock_add_region(&memblock.reserved, ret, size))
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
return ret;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
start = this_end;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:09 +07:00
|
|
|
return MEMBLOCK_ERROR;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int nid)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
struct memblock_type *mem = &memblock.memory;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUG_ON(0 == size);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:24:57 +07:00
|
|
|
/* We align the size to limit fragmentation. Without this, a lot of
|
|
|
|
* small allocs quickly eat up the whole reserve array on sparc
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
size = memblock_align_up(size, align);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:38:59 +07:00
|
|
|
/* We do a bottom-up search for a region with the right
|
|
|
|
* nid since that's easier considering how memblock_nid_range()
|
|
|
|
* works
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < mem->cnt; i++) {
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t ret = memblock_alloc_nid_region(&mem->regions[i],
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
size, align, nid);
|
2010-07-07 05:39:09 +07:00
|
|
|
if (ret != MEMBLOCK_ERROR)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
return ret;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:17 +07:00
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_try_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int nid)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
phys_addr_t res = memblock_alloc_nid(size, align, nid);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (res)
|
|
|
|
return res;
|
2010-07-07 05:39:18 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock_alloc_base(size, align, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:17 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Remaining API functions
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
/* You must call memblock_analyze() before this. */
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init memblock_phys_mem_size(void)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-07-28 11:31:29 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock.memory_size;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_end_of_DRAM(void)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
int idx = memblock.memory.cnt - 1;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
return (memblock.memory.regions[idx].base + memblock.memory.regions[idx].size);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* You must call memblock_analyze() after this. */
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
void __init memblock_enforce_memory_limit(phys_addr_t memory_limit)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
unsigned long i;
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
phys_addr_t limit;
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
struct memblock_region *p;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!memory_limit)
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Truncate the memblock regions to satisfy the memory limit. */
|
|
|
|
limit = memory_limit;
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < memblock.memory.cnt; i++) {
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
if (limit > memblock.memory.regions[i].size) {
|
|
|
|
limit -= memblock.memory.regions[i].size;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
memblock.memory.regions[i].size = limit;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
memblock.memory.cnt = i + 1;
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
memory_limit = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* And truncate any reserves above the limit also. */
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < memblock.reserved.cnt; i++) {
|
2010-08-04 11:06:41 +07:00
|
|
|
p = &memblock.reserved.regions[i];
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (p->base > memory_limit)
|
|
|
|
p->size = 0;
|
|
|
|
else if ((p->base + p->size) > memory_limit)
|
|
|
|
p->size = memory_limit - p->base;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (p->size == 0) {
|
|
|
|
memblock_remove_region(&memblock.reserved, i);
|
|
|
|
i--;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-10-12 02:34:09 +07:00
|
|
|
static int __init_memblock memblock_search(struct memblock_type *type, phys_addr_t addr)
|
2010-08-04 11:38:47 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
unsigned int left = 0, right = type->cnt;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
do {
|
|
|
|
unsigned int mid = (right + left) / 2;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (addr < type->regions[mid].base)
|
|
|
|
right = mid;
|
|
|
|
else if (addr >= (type->regions[mid].base +
|
|
|
|
type->regions[mid].size))
|
|
|
|
left = mid + 1;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
return mid;
|
|
|
|
} while (left < right);
|
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-08-04 10:34:42 +07:00
|
|
|
int __init memblock_is_reserved(phys_addr_t addr)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 11:38:47 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock_search(&memblock.reserved, addr) != -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-09-16 03:05:29 +07:00
|
|
|
int __init_memblock memblock_is_memory(phys_addr_t addr)
|
2010-08-04 11:38:47 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return memblock_search(&memblock.memory, addr) != -1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-09-16 03:05:29 +07:00
|
|
|
int __init_memblock memblock_is_region_memory(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-08-04 11:38:47 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2011-01-21 05:44:20 +07:00
|
|
|
int idx = memblock_search(&memblock.memory, base);
|
2010-08-04 11:38:47 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (idx == -1)
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2011-01-21 05:44:20 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock.memory.regions[idx].base <= base &&
|
|
|
|
(memblock.memory.regions[idx].base +
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory.regions[idx].size) >= (base + size);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
int __init_memblock memblock_is_region_reserved(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
2010-08-04 11:17:17 +07:00
|
|
|
return memblock_overlaps_region(&memblock.reserved, base, size) >= 0;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:09 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:01 +07:00
|
|
|
|
2010-09-16 03:05:29 +07:00
|
|
|
void __init_memblock memblock_set_current_limit(phys_addr_t limit)
|
2010-07-07 05:39:01 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
memblock.current_limit = limit;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
static void __init_memblock memblock_dump(struct memblock_type *region, char *name)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
unsigned long long base, size;
|
|
|
|
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pr_info(" %s.cnt = 0x%lx\n", name, region->cnt);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < region->cnt; i++) {
|
|
|
|
base = region->regions[i].base;
|
|
|
|
size = region->regions[i].size;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:13:22 +07:00
|
|
|
pr_info(" %s[%#x]\t[%#016llx-%#016llx], %#llx bytes\n",
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
name, i, base, base + size - 1, size);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
void __init_memblock memblock_dump_all(void)
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (!memblock_debug)
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pr_info("MEMBLOCK configuration:\n");
|
|
|
|
pr_info(" memory size = 0x%llx\n", (unsigned long long)memblock.memory_size);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
memblock_dump(&memblock.memory, "memory");
|
|
|
|
memblock_dump(&memblock.reserved, "reserved");
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void __init memblock_analyze(void)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Check marker in the unused last array entry */
|
|
|
|
WARN_ON(memblock_memory_init_regions[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS].base
|
2011-07-26 07:12:18 +07:00
|
|
|
!= MEMBLOCK_INACTIVE);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
WARN_ON(memblock_reserved_init_regions[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS].base
|
2011-07-26 07:12:18 +07:00
|
|
|
!= MEMBLOCK_INACTIVE);
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory_size = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < memblock.memory.cnt; i++)
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory_size += memblock.memory.regions[i].size;
|
2010-07-07 05:39:13 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* We allow resizing from there */
|
|
|
|
memblock_can_resize = 1;
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:10 +07:00
|
|
|
void __init memblock_init(void)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2010-10-07 05:52:29 +07:00
|
|
|
static int init_done __initdata = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (init_done)
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
init_done = 1;
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-07 05:39:10 +07:00
|
|
|
/* Hookup the initial arrays */
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory.regions = memblock_memory_init_regions;
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory.max = INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS;
|
|
|
|
memblock.reserved.regions = memblock_reserved_init_regions;
|
|
|
|
memblock.reserved.max = INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Write a marker in the unused last array entry */
|
2011-07-26 07:12:18 +07:00
|
|
|
memblock.memory.regions[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS].base = MEMBLOCK_INACTIVE;
|
|
|
|
memblock.reserved.regions[INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS].base = MEMBLOCK_INACTIVE;
|
2010-07-07 05:39:10 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Create a dummy zero size MEMBLOCK which will get coalesced away later.
|
|
|
|
* This simplifies the memblock_add() code below...
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory.regions[0].base = 0;
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory.regions[0].size = 0;
|
|
|
|
memblock.memory.cnt = 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Ditto. */
|
|
|
|
memblock.reserved.regions[0].base = 0;
|
|
|
|
memblock.reserved.regions[0].size = 0;
|
|
|
|
memblock.reserved.cnt = 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
memblock.current_limit = MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-12 11:36:48 +07:00
|
|
|
static int __init early_memblock(char *p)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
if (p && strstr(p, "debug"))
|
|
|
|
memblock_debug = 1;
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
early_param("memblock", early_memblock);
|
|
|
|
|
2010-07-28 12:43:02 +07:00
|
|
|
#if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS) && !defined(ARCH_DISCARD_MEMBLOCK)
|
2010-07-07 05:39:19 +07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int memblock_debug_show(struct seq_file *m, void *private)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct memblock_type *type = m->private;
|
|
|
|
struct memblock_region *reg;
|
|
|
|
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < type->cnt; i++) {
|
|
|
|
reg = &type->regions[i];
|
|
|
|
seq_printf(m, "%4d: ", i);
|
|
|
|
if (sizeof(phys_addr_t) == 4)
|
|
|
|
seq_printf(m, "0x%08lx..0x%08lx\n",
|
|
|
|
(unsigned long)reg->base,
|
|
|
|
(unsigned long)(reg->base + reg->size - 1));
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
seq_printf(m, "0x%016llx..0x%016llx\n",
|
|
|
|
(unsigned long long)reg->base,
|
|
|
|
(unsigned long long)(reg->base + reg->size - 1));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int memblock_debug_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return single_open(file, memblock_debug_show, inode->i_private);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static const struct file_operations memblock_debug_fops = {
|
|
|
|
.open = memblock_debug_open,
|
|
|
|
.read = seq_read,
|
|
|
|
.llseek = seq_lseek,
|
|
|
|
.release = single_release,
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int __init memblock_init_debugfs(void)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct dentry *root = debugfs_create_dir("memblock", NULL);
|
|
|
|
if (!root)
|
|
|
|
return -ENXIO;
|
|
|
|
debugfs_create_file("memory", S_IRUGO, root, &memblock.memory, &memblock_debug_fops);
|
|
|
|
debugfs_create_file("reserved", S_IRUGO, root, &memblock.reserved, &memblock_debug_fops);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
__initcall(memblock_init_debugfs);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_FS */
|