Re: [PATCH v3] m68k: Fix memblock-related crashes

[Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>]

On Sat, Dec 08, 2018 at 11:51:38AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 10:02 PM Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 05:50:11PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Sun-3 must be broken before this fix, as it fills in m68k_memory[0] in
> > > config_sun3(), i.e. after m68k_parse_bootinfo().
> > > Sun-3 is not fixed by this fix, as it uses its own paging_init(), not
> > > the one in motorola.c.
> > > Fixing Sun-3 requires adding memblock_add()/memblock_reserve() calls to
> > > the Sun-3 memory management code.
> >
> > I think that adding memblock_add() to config_sun3 would be sufficient,
> > something like the diff below. This will make memblock aware of the
> > available physical memory and it seems there no allocations in sun3 before
> > paging_init().
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/m68k/sun3/config.c b/arch/m68k/sun3/config.c
> > index 542c440..9a5b9dd 100644
> > --- a/arch/m68k/sun3/config.c
> > +++ b/arch/m68k/sun3/config.c
> > @@ -150,6 +150,7 @@ void __init config_sun3(void)
> >
> >         m68k_num_memory=1;
> >          m68k_memory[0].size=*(romvec->pv_sun3mem);
> > +       memblock_add(memory_start, memory_end - memory_start);
> >
> >         sun3_bootmem_alloc(memory_start, memory_end);
> >  }
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> It doesn't need a memblock_reserve() for the kernel, as memory_start is
> already adjusted for that, right?

Yes, unless I've missed something.
 
> Anyone who can test this is on Sun-3? Thanks!
> 
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
>                         Geert
> 
> -- 
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
> 
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.