From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: "Dave Young" <dyoung@redhat.com>,
"Nicolai Stange" <nicstange@gmail.com>,
"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Mika Penttilä" <mika.penttila@nextfour.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] efi: efi_mem_reserve(): don't reserve through memblock after mm_init()
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 13:45:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170109134502.GK16838@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170109133152.2izkcrzgzinxdwux@techsingularity.net>
On Mon, 09 Jan, at 01:31:52PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> Well, you could put in a __init global variable about availability into
> mm/memblock.c and then check it in memblock APIs like memblock_reserve()
> to BUG_ON? I know BUG_ON is frowned upon but this is not likely to be a
> situation that can be sensibly recovered.
Indeed. I've only ever seen this situation lead to silent memory
corruption and bitter tears.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: "Dave Young" <dyoung@redhat.com>,
"Nicolai Stange" <nicstange@gmail.com>,
"Ard Biesheuvel" <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Mika Penttilä" <mika.penttila@nextfour.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, "Vlastimil Babka" <vbabka@suse.cz>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] efi: efi_mem_reserve(): don't reserve through memblock after mm_init()
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 13:45:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170109134502.GK16838@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170109133152.2izkcrzgzinxdwux@techsingularity.net>
On Mon, 09 Jan, at 01:31:52PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
>
> Well, you could put in a __init global variable about availability into
> mm/memblock.c and then check it in memblock APIs like memblock_reserve()
> to BUG_ON? I know BUG_ON is frowned upon but this is not likely to be a
> situation that can be sensibly recovered.
Indeed. I've only ever seen this situation lead to silent memory
corruption and bitter tears.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-09 13:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-22 10:23 [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/efi: don't allocate memmap through memblock after mm_init() Nicolai Stange
2016-12-22 10:23 ` Nicolai Stange
2016-12-22 10:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] efi: efi_mem_reserve(): don't reserve " Nicolai Stange
2017-01-05 9:12 ` Dave Young
2017-01-05 9:12 ` Dave Young
2017-01-09 11:44 ` Matt Fleming
2017-01-09 11:44 ` Matt Fleming
2017-01-09 13:31 ` Mel Gorman
2017-01-09 13:31 ` Mel Gorman
2017-01-09 13:45 ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2017-01-09 13:45 ` Matt Fleming
2017-02-27 21:57 ` Matt Fleming
2017-02-27 21:57 ` Matt Fleming
2017-02-27 21:57 ` Matt Fleming
2017-01-10 0:37 ` Dave Young
2017-01-10 0:37 ` Dave Young
2017-01-10 12:51 ` Matt Fleming
2017-01-10 12:51 ` Matt Fleming
2017-01-11 8:04 ` Dave Young
2017-01-11 8:04 ` Dave Young
2016-12-23 14:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/efi: don't allocate memmap " Matt Fleming
2016-12-23 21:12 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-01-05 7:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-05 7:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-05 9:15 ` Dave Young
2017-01-05 9:15 ` Dave Young
2017-01-05 9:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-05 10:15 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-01-05 10:15 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-01-05 11:34 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-05 11:34 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-01-05 12:53 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-01-05 12:53 ` Nicolai Stange
2017-01-04 18:40 ` Dan Williams
2017-01-04 18:40 ` Dan Williams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170109134502.GK16838@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=mika.penttila@nextfour.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nicstange@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.