From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Oct 15
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 16:36:56 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181016133656.GA10925@rapoport-lnx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181015151319.3a443f0421c20bd7ed055cb9@linux-foundation.org>
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:13:19PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 07:24:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 07:12:40 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 11:26:37 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > ALl ppc qemu tests (including big endian pseries) also generate a warning.
> > > >
> > > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at mm/memblock.c:1301 .memblock_alloc_range_nid+0x20/0x68
> >
> > That is:
> >
> > static phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_range_nid(phys_addr_t size,
> > phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t start,
> > phys_addr_t end, int nid,
> > enum memblock_flags flags)
> > {
> > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!align))
> > align = SMP_CACHE_BYTES;
> >
> > Looks like patch
> >
> > "memblock: stop using implicit alignment to SMP_CACHE_BYTES"
> >
> > missed some places ...
>
> To be expected, I guess. I'm pretty relaxed about this ;) Let's do
> another sweep in a week or so, after which we'll have a couple of
> months to mop up any leftovers.
After some more grepping and spatching I've found these:
>From 8b014bae53a78ab747dbb76b9aff7df4cefcb604 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 16:03:00 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] memblock: fix missed uses of implicit aligment
A couple of memblock*alloc uses were missed during conversion from implicit
alignment setting with 'align = 0' to explictly using SMP_CACHE_BYTES.
Fix them now.
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c | 2 +-
drivers/firmware/efi/memmap.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c
index f331a00..913bfca 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c
@@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ void __init allocate_paca_ptrs(void)
paca_nr_cpu_ids = nr_cpu_ids;
paca_ptrs_size = sizeof(struct paca_struct *) * nr_cpu_ids;
- paca_ptrs = __va(memblock_phys_alloc(paca_ptrs_size, 0));
+ paca_ptrs = __va(memblock_phys_alloc(paca_ptrs_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES));
memset(paca_ptrs, 0x88, paca_ptrs_size);
}
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/memmap.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/memmap.c
index ef618bc..fa2904f 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/memmap.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/memmap.c
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
static phys_addr_t __init __efi_memmap_alloc_early(unsigned long size)
{
- return memblock_phys_alloc(size, 0);
+ return memblock_phys_alloc(size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
}
static phys_addr_t __init __efi_memmap_alloc_late(unsigned long size)
--
2.7.4
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-16 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-15 8:25 linux-next: Tree for Oct 15 Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-15 18:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 20:12 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-15 20:24 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-15 22:13 ` Andrew Morton
2018-10-16 13:36 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2018-10-16 20:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-15 20:35 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-15 21:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 21:48 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-15 22:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 22:13 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-15 22:28 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 22:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 22:52 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-16 1:00 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-16 1:34 ` David Miller
2018-10-15 19:39 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 20:33 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-15 21:35 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-15 22:22 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-16 2:02 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-16 2:19 ` Stephen Rothwell
2018-10-16 3:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-10-15 10:06 Stephen Rothwell
2020-10-15 7:28 Stephen Rothwell
2019-10-15 5:16 Stephen Rothwell
2015-10-15 7:51 Stephen Rothwell
2014-10-15 4:29 Stephen Rothwell
2013-10-15 14:02 Thierry Reding
2013-10-16 5:21 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-10-16 15:50 ` Thierry Reding
2013-10-16 16:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-10-16 16:43 ` Thierry Reding
2012-10-15 2:41 Stephen Rothwell
2008-10-15 10:58 linux-next tree " Stephen Rothwell
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=20181016133656.GA10925@rapoport-lnx \
--to=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).