[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 3/3] memblock: cleanup memblock_free interface
- To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 11:47:48 +0200
- Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-efi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-um@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kasan-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, iommu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 09:47:55 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
Le 23/09/2021 à 09:43, Mike Rapoport a écrit :
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
For ages memblock_free() interface dealt with physical addresses even
despite the existence of memblock_alloc_xx() functions that return a
virtual pointer.
Introduce memblock_phys_free() for freeing physical ranges and repurpose
memblock_free() to free virtual pointers to make the following pairing
abundantly clear:
int memblock_phys_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
phys_addr_t memblock_phys_alloc(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size);
void *memblock_alloc(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align);
void memblock_free(void *ptr, size_t size);
Replace intermediate memblock_free_ptr() with memblock_free() and drop
unnecessary aliases memblock_free_early() and memblock_free_early_nid().
Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
index 1a04e5bdf655..37826d8c4f74 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
@@ -723,7 +723,7 @@ void __init smp_save_dump_cpus(void)
/* Get the CPU registers */
smp_save_cpu_regs(sa, addr, is_boot_cpu, page);
}
- memblock_free(page, PAGE_SIZE);
+ memblock_phys_free(page, PAGE_SIZE);
diag_amode31_ops.diag308_reset();
pcpu_set_smt(0);
}
@@ -880,7 +880,7 @@ void __init smp_detect_cpus(void)
/* Add CPUs present at boot */
__smp_rescan_cpus(info, true);
- memblock_free_early((unsigned long)info, sizeof(*info));
+ memblock_free(info, sizeof(*info));
}
/*
I'm a bit lost. IIUC memblock_free_early() and memblock_free() where
identical.
In the first hunk memblock_free() gets replaced by memblock_phys_free()
In the second hunk memblock_free_early() gets replaced by memblock_free()
I think it would be easier to follow if you could split it in several
patches:
- First patch: Create memblock_phys_free() and change all relevant
memblock_free() to memblock_phys_free() - Or change memblock_free() to
memblock_phys_free() and make memblock_free() an alias of it.
- Second patch: Make memblock_free_ptr() become memblock_free() and
change all remaining callers to the new semantics (IIUC
memblock_free(__pa(ptr)) becomes memblock_free(ptr) and make
memblock_free_ptr() an alias of memblock_free()
- Fourth patch: Replace and drop memblock_free_ptr()
- Fifth patch: Drop memblock_free_early() and memblock_free_early_nid()
(All users should have been upgraded to memblock_free_phys() in patch 1
or memblock_free() in patch 2)
Christophe
|