On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 07:25:53PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 04:51:53PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 04:19:33PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > > Since only the virtual address of allocated blocks is used,
> > > lets use functions returning directly virtual address.
> > >
> > > Those functions have the advantage of also zeroing the block.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.ibm.com>
> > > Acked-by: Mike Rapoport <r...@linux.ibm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@c-s.fr>
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > +static void *__init alloc_stack(void)
> > > +{
> > > + void *ptr = memblock_alloc(THREAD_SIZE, THREAD_SIZE);
> > > +
> > > + if (!ptr)
> > > + panic("cannot allocate stacks");
> > > +
> > > + return ptr;
> > > +}
> >
> > I believe memblock_alloc() will panic() if it cannot allocate memory,
> > since that goes:
> >
> > memblock_alloc()
> > -> memblock_alloc_try_nid()
> > -> panic()
> >
> > So you can get rid of the panic() here, or if you want a custom panic
> > message, you can use memblock_alloc_nopanic().
>
> As we've already discussed it in [1], I'm working on removing the
> _nopanic() versions and dropping the panic() calls from memblock_alloc()
> and friends.
>
> I've posted v2 of the patches earlier this week [2].
>
> > [...]
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190108143428.GB14063@rapoport-lnx/
> [2]
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1548057848-15136-1-git-send-email-r...@linux.ibm.com/
Fair enough.
Feel free to take the ack regardless, then!
Thanks,
Mark.
