summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>2012-02-29 05:56:21 +0900
committerIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>2012-03-01 10:53:18 +0100
commit847854f5988a04fe7e02d2fdd4fa0df9f96360fe (patch)
treec1c1e4de2f0221b63d359961e54d2977d90b9536
parent88ebdda6159ffc15699f204c33feb3e431bf9bdc (diff)
downloadlinux-847854f5988a04fe7e02d2fdd4fa0df9f96360fe.tar.bz2
memblock: Fix size aligning of memblock_alloc_base_nid()
memblock allocator aligns @size to @align to reduce the amount of fragmentation. Commit: 7bd0b0f0da ("memblock: Reimplement memblock allocation using reverse free area iterator") Broke it by incorrectly relocating @size aligning to memblock_find_in_range_node(). As the aligned size is not propagated back to memblock_alloc_base_nid(), the actually reserved size isn't aligned. While this increases memory use for memblock reserved array, this shouldn't cause any critical failure; however, it seems that the size aligning was hiding a use-beyond-allocation bug in sparc64 and losing the aligning causes boot failure. The underlying problem is currently being debugged but this is a proper fix in itself, it's already pretty late in -rc cycle for boot failures and reverting the change for debugging isn't difficult. Restore the size aligning moving it to memblock_alloc_base_nid(). Reported-by: Meelis Roos <mroos@linux.ee> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120228205621.GC3252@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> LKML-Reference: <alpine.SOC.1.00.1202130942030.1488@math.ut.ee>
-rw-r--r--mm/memblock.c6
1 files changed, 3 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
index 77b5f227e1d8..99f285599501 100644
--- a/mm/memblock.c
+++ b/mm/memblock.c
@@ -99,9 +99,6 @@ phys_addr_t __init_memblock memblock_find_in_range_node(phys_addr_t start,
phys_addr_t this_start, this_end, cand;
u64 i;
- /* align @size to avoid excessive fragmentation on reserved array */
- size = round_up(size, align);
-
/* pump up @end */
if (end == MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE)
end = memblock.current_limit;
@@ -731,6 +728,9 @@ static phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_base_nid(phys_addr_t size,
{
phys_addr_t found;
+ /* align @size to avoid excessive fragmentation on reserved array */
+ size = round_up(size, align);
+
found = memblock_find_in_range_node(0, max_addr, size, align, nid);
if (found && !memblock_reserve(found, size))
return found;