On 07/01/16 at 08:16pm, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 03:50:32PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> >Hi Xiaolong,
> >
> >Could you please apply below patch and see if it works for you?
> 
> Hi, Baoquan,
> 
> Please check enclosed dmesg after apply your fix patch, does it meet
> your expectation?

It works, but didn't get a random phy addr. I am a little worried. I
guess your system has a very small physical memory space. Could you
apply attached patch on top of fix patch and Yinghai's debug patch and
paste the result? I want to check the physical memory and mem_avoid
region to make sure it.

Or if you can paste /proc/iomem I can have a quick check, then you don't
need to run the patch.

> 
> Thanks,
> Xiaolong
> 
> >
> >From 46c2a9ecd11f61d952253e005bbd7dcbffa652fb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> >Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:34:40 +0800
> >Subject: [PATCH] x86/KASLR: Fix code bug of finding earliest overlap
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> >---
> > arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> >diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> >index 304c5c3..8e1fdf7 100644
> >--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> >+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
> >@@ -285,6 +285,7 @@ static bool mem_avoid_overlap(struct mem_vector *img,
> > 		if (mem_overlaps(img, &mem_avoid[i]) &&
> > 		    mem_avoid[i].start < earliest) {
> > 			*overlap = mem_avoid[i];
> >+			earliest = overlap->start;
> > 			is_overlapping = true;
> > 		}
> > 	}
> >@@ -299,6 +300,7 @@ static bool mem_avoid_overlap(struct mem_vector *img,
> > 
> > 		if (mem_overlaps(img, &avoid) && (avoid.start < earliest)) {
> > 			*overlap = avoid;
> >+			earliest = overlap->start;
> > 			is_overlapping = true;
> > 		}
> > 
> >-- 
> >2.5.5
> >