From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758430AbcKCP6C (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:58:02 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:40892 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758372AbcKCP6A (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2016 11:58:00 -0400 Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 15:57:54 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: Laura Abbott Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Marek Szyprowski , Joonsoo Kim , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 6/6] arm64: Add support for CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL Message-ID: <20161103155753.GG25852@remoulade> References: <20161102210054.16621-1-labbott@redhat.com> <20161102210054.16621-7-labbott@redhat.com> <20161102230642.GB19591@remoulade> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 06:05:38PM -0600, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 11/02/2016 05:06 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 03:00:54PM -0600, Laura Abbott wrote: > >>+CFLAGS_physaddr.o := -DTEXT_OFFSET=$(TEXT_OFFSET) > >>+obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL) += physaddr.o > >>+ /* > >>+ * This is intentionally different than above to be a tighter check > >>+ * for symbols. > >>+ */ > >>+ VIRTUAL_BUG_ON(x < kimage_vaddr + TEXT_OFFSET || x > (unsigned long) _end); > > > >Can't we use _text instead of kimage_vaddr + TEXT_OFFSET? That way we don't > >need CFLAGS_physaddr.o. > > > >Or KERNEL_START / KERNEL_END from ? > > > >Otherwise, this looks good to me (though I haven't grokked the need for > >__pa_symbol() yet). > > I guess it's a question of what's clearer. I like kimage_vaddr + > TEXT_OFFSET because it clearly states we are checking from the > start of the kernel image vs. _text only shows the start of the > text region. Yes, it's technically the same but a little less > obvious. I suppose that could be solved with some more elaboration > in the comment. Sure, it's arguable either way. I do think that KERNEL_START/KERNEL_END are a better choice, with the comment you suggest, and/or renamed to KERNEL_IMAGE_*. They already describe the bounds of the image (though the naming doesn't make that entirely clear). Thanks, Mark.