From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo....@lge.com> Hello, all.
This patchset deals with some problematic sites that iterate pfn range. There is a system that node's pfn are overlapped like as following. -----pfn--------> N0 N1 N2 N0 N1 N2 Therefore, we need to care this overlapping when iterating pfn range. I audit many iterating sites that uses pfn_valid(), pfn_valid_within(), zone_start_pfn and etc. and others looks safe for me. This is a preparation step for new CMA implementation, ZONE_CMA [1], because it would be easily overlapped with other zones. But, zone overlap check is also needed for general case so I send it separately. This is based on next-20160311. Thanks. [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/12/95 Joonsoo Kim (6): mm/page_alloc: fix same zone check in __pageblock_pfn_to_page() mm/hugetlb: add same zone check in pfn_range_valid_gigantic() mm/memory_hotplug: add comment to some functions related to memory hotplug mm/vmstat: add zone range overlapping check mm/page_owner: add zone range overlapping check power: add zone range overlapping check mm/hugetlb.c | 9 ++++++--- mm/page_alloc.c | 10 +++++++--- mm/page_isolation.c | 1 + mm/page_owner.c | 3 +++ mm/vmstat.c | 7 +++++++ 5 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) -- 1.9.1
