Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH 01/21] e820, efi: add ACPI 6.0 persistent memory types

[Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 5:46 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 09:35:19PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c b/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c
>> index c52d7540dc05..cd8b7485e396 100644
>> --- a/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c
>> +++ b/arch/ia64/kernel/efi.c
>> @@ -1227,6 +1227,7 @@ efi_initialize_iomem_resources(struct resource *code_resource,
>>                       case EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE:
>>                       case EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA:
>>                       case EFI_ACPI_RECLAIM_MEMORY:
>> +                     case EFI_PERSISTENT_MEMORY:
>>                       default:
>>                               name = "reserved";
>
> You probably want pmem as name here..
>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
>> index 11cc7d54ec3f..410af501a941 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
>> @@ -137,6 +137,8 @@ static void __init e820_print_type(u32 type)
>>       case E820_RESERVED_KERN:
>>               printk(KERN_CONT "usable");
>>               break;
>> +     case E820_PMEM:
>> +     case E820_PRAM:
>>       case E820_RESERVED:
>>               printk(KERN_CONT "reserved");
>>               break;
>> @@ -149,9 +151,6 @@ static void __init e820_print_type(u32 type)
>>       case E820_UNUSABLE:
>>               printk(KERN_CONT "unusable");
>>               break;
>> -     case E820_PRAM:
>> -             printk(KERN_CONT "persistent (type %u)", type);
>> -             break;
>
> Please keep this printk, and add the new E820_PMEM case to it as well.
>
>> +static bool do_mark_busy(u32 type, struct resource *res)
>> +{
>> +     if (res->start < (1ULL<<20))
>> +             return true;
>> +
>> +     switch (type) {
>> +     case E820_RESERVED:
>> +     case E820_PRAM:
>> +     case E820_PMEM:
>> +             return false;
>> +     default:
>> +             return true;
>> +     }
>> +}
>
> Please add a comment explaining the choices once you start refactoring
> this.  Especially the address check is black magic..

Ok, I was able to incorporate all these into v2.