summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorYinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>2013-06-13 13:17:01 -0700
committerH. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>2013-06-18 11:32:02 -0500
commitd8d386c10630d8f7837700f4c466443d49e12cc0 (patch)
tree227534edaf07e34e7613c2847674fb0fd8b6c01a /arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c
parent7d132055814ef17a6c7b69f342244c410a5e000f (diff)
x86, mtrr: Fix original mtrr range get for mtrr_cleanup
Joshua reported: Commit cd7b304dfaf1 (x86, range: fix missing merge during add range) broke mtrr cleanup on his setup in 3.9.5. corresponding commit in upstream is fbe06b7bae7c. *BAD*gran_size: 64K chunk_size: 16M num_reg: 6 lose cover RAM: -0G https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59491 So it rejects new var mtrr layout. It turns out we have some problem with initial mtrr range retrieval. The current sequence is: x86_get_mtrr_mem_range ==> bunchs of add_range_with_merge ==> bunchs of subract_range ==> clean_sort_range add_range_with_merge for [0,1M) sort_range() add_range_with_merge could have blank slots, so we can not just sort only, that will have final result have extra blank slot in head. So move that calling add_range_with_merge for [0,1M), with that we could avoid extra clean_sort_range calling. Reported-by: Joshua Covington <joshuacov@googlemail.com> Tested-by: Joshua Covington <joshuacov@googlemail.com> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1371154622-8929-2-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> v3.9 Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c')
-rw-r--r--arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c8
1 files changed, 4 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c
index 35ffda5d072..5f90b85ff22 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/cleanup.c
@@ -714,15 +714,15 @@ int __init mtrr_cleanup(unsigned address_bits)
if (mtrr_tom2)
x_remove_size = (mtrr_tom2 >> PAGE_SHIFT) - x_remove_base;
- nr_range = x86_get_mtrr_mem_range(range, 0, x_remove_base, x_remove_size);
/*
* [0, 1M) should always be covered by var mtrr with WB
* and fixed mtrrs should take effect before var mtrr for it:
*/
- nr_range = add_range_with_merge(range, RANGE_NUM, nr_range, 0,
+ nr_range = add_range_with_merge(range, RANGE_NUM, 0, 0,
1ULL<<(20 - PAGE_SHIFT));
- /* Sort the ranges: */
- sort_range(range, nr_range);
+ /* add from var mtrr at last */
+ nr_range = x86_get_mtrr_mem_range(range, nr_range,
+ x_remove_base, x_remove_size);
range_sums = sum_ranges(range, nr_range);
printk(KERN_INFO "total RAM covered: %ldM\n",