From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S937100AbdAFESl (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 5 Jan 2017 23:18:41 -0500
Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com ([209.85.223.175]:35762 "EHLO
        mail-io0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752533AbdAFER1 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 5 Jan 2017 23:17:27 -0500
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 23:17:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
To: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
cc: Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lilja.magnus@gmail.com,
        festevam@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] arm: Cleanup sanity_check_meminfo
In-Reply-To: <1483657274-11346-2-git-send-email-labbott@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1701052308020.21662@knanqh.ubzr>
References: <1483657274-11346-1-git-send-email-labbott@redhat.com> <1483657274-11346-2-git-send-email-labbott@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LFD 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 5 Jan 2017, Laura Abbott wrote:

> 
> The logic for sanity_check_meminfo has become difficult to
> follow. Clean up the code so it's more obvious what the code
> is actually trying to do. Additionally, meminfo is now removed
> so rename the function to better describe it's purpose.

s/it's/its/

> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
> ---
> v2: Fixed code so b9a019899f61 ("ARM: 8590/1: sanity_check_meminfo():
> avoid overflow on vmalloc_limit") should stay fixed. The casting and assignment
> still seem ugly.

Are you referring to the initial vmalloc_limit assignment?

> @@ -1172,43 +1170,19 @@ void __init sanity_check_meminfo(void)
>  	for_each_memblock(memory, reg) {
>  		phys_addr_t block_start = reg->base;
>  		phys_addr_t block_end = reg->base + reg->size;
> -		phys_addr_t size_limit = reg->size;
>  
> -		if (reg->base >= vmalloc_limit)
> -			highmem = 1;
> -		else
> -			size_limit = vmalloc_limit - reg->base;
>  
> -
[...]

This leaves a spurious empty line. One was already there before your 
patch but this would be a good opportunity to remove it.

Other than that...

Reviewed-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>


Nicolas