From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933828AbeEIIMS (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2018 04:12:18 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60046 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753176AbeEIIMP (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2018 04:12:15 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:12:14 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Minchan Kim Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-mm Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memblock: print memblock_remove Message-ID: <20180509081214.GE32366@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20180508104223.8028-1-minchan@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180508104223.8028-1-minchan@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 08-05-18 19:42:23, Minchan Kim wrote: > memblock_remove report is useful to see why MemTotal of /proc/meminfo > between two kernels makes difference. > > Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim > --- > mm/memblock.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c > index 5228f594b13c..03d48d8835ba 100644 > --- a/mm/memblock.c > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > @@ -697,6 +697,11 @@ static int __init_memblock memblock_remove_range(struct memblock_type *type, > > int __init_memblock memblock_remove(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size) > { > + phys_addr_t end = base + size - 1; > + > + memblock_dbg("memblock_remove: [%pa-%pa] %pS\n", > + &base, &end, (void *)_RET_IP_); Other callers of memblock_dbg use %pF. Is there any reason to be different here? Other that that looks ok to me. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs