On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 08:58:00AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Under CONFIG_DISCONTIGMEM, assuming that a !pfn_valid() implies all
> subsequent pfn-s are also invalid is wrong. Thus replace this by
> explicitly checking against the E820 map.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Acked-by: Mark Langsdorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> --- linux-2.6.21-rc5/drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c 2007-03-26
> 15:20:14.000000000 +0200
> +++ 2.6.21-rc5-amd64-agp/drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c 2007-03-28
> 15:20:49.000000000 +0200
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> #include <linux/agp_backend.h>
> #include <linux/mmzone.h>
> #include <asm/page.h> /* PAGE_SIZE */
> +#include <asm/e820.h>
> #include <asm/k8.h>
> #include "agp.h"
>
> @@ -259,7 +260,6 @@ static const struct agp_bridge_driver am
> /* Some basic sanity checks for the aperture. */
> static int __devinit aperture_valid(u64 aper, u32 size)
> {
> - u32 pfn, c;
> if (aper == 0) {
> printk(KERN_ERR PFX "No aperture\n");
> return 0;
> @@ -272,14 +272,9 @@ static int __devinit aperture_valid(u64
> printk(KERN_ERR PFX "Aperture out of bounds\n");
> return 0;
> }
> - pfn = aper >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> - for (c = 0; c < size/PAGE_SIZE; c++) {
> - if (!pfn_valid(pfn + c))
> - break;
> - if (!PageReserved(pfn_to_page(pfn + c))) {
> - printk(KERN_ERR PFX "Aperture pointing to RAM\n");
> - return 0;
> - }
> + if (e820_any_mapped(aper, aper + size, E820_RAM)) {
> + printk(KERN_ERR PFX "Aperture pointing to RAM\n");
> + return 0;
> }
This pretty much duplicates the checking done in
arch/x86-64/kernel/aperture.c:aperture_valid(), with slight variations
(e.g., 32MB vs. 64MB aperture size). Should these two functions be
consolidated?
Cheers,
Muli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
