Re: [PATCH 4/4] memblock: stop poisoning raw allocations
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-08-03 07:58:51
Also in:
lkml
On Sat, Jul 31, 2021 at 10:13:04AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Wed, 2021-07-14 at 15:37 +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:quoted
From: Mike Rapoport <redacted> Functions memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw() and memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw() are intended for early memory allocation without overhead of zeroing the allocated memory. Since these functions were used to allocate the memory map, they have ended up with addition of a call to page_init_poison() that poisoned the allocated memory when CONFIG_PAGE_POISON was set. Since the memory map is allocated using a dedicated memmep_alloc() function that takes care of the poisoning, remove page poisoning from the memblock_alloc_*_raw() functions.[]quoted
diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c[]quoted
@@ -1490,18 +1490,12 @@ void * __init memblock_alloc_exact_nid_raw(phys_addr_t min_addr, phys_addr_t max_addr, int nid) { - void *ptr; - memblock_dbg("%s: %llu bytes align=0x%llx nid=%d from=%pa max_addr=%pa %pS\n", __func__, (u64)size, (u64)align, nid, &min_addr, &max_addr, (void *)_RET_IP_);unassociated trivia: casting _RET_IP_ back to void * seems odd as the define is include/linux/kernel.h:#define _RET_IP_ (unsigned long)__builtin_return_address(0) It's probably easier to understand as just __builtin_return_address(0)
Maybe, but I'm not sure it's worth the churn.
quoted
@@ -1528,18 +1522,12 @@ void * __init memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(phys_addr_t min_addr, phys_addr_t max_addr, int nid) { - void *ptr; - memblock_dbg("%s: %llu bytes align=0x%llx nid=%d from=%pa max_addr=%pa %pS\n", __func__, (u64)size, (u64)align, nid, &min_addr, &max_addr, (void *)_RET_IP_);here too
-- Sincerely yours, Mike.