On non-BIOS platforms it is possible that the BIOS data area contains
garbage instead of being zeroed or something equivalent (firmware
people: we are talking of 1.5K here, so please do the sane thing.)
We need on the order of 20-30K of low memory in order to boot, which
may grow up to < 64K in the future. We probably want to avoid the
lowest of the low memory. At the same time, it seems extremely
unlikely that a legitimate EBDA would ever reach down to the 128K
(which would require it to be over half a megabyte in size.) Thus,
pick 128K as the cutoff for "this is insane, ignore." We may still
end up reserving a bunch of extra memory on the low megabyte, but that
is not really a major issue these days. In the worst case we lose
512K of RAM.
This code really should be merged with trim_bios_range() in
arch/x86/kernel/setup.c, but that is a bigger patch for a later merge
window.
Reported-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-oebml055yyfm8yxmria09rja@git.kernel.org
Other than sanity check and debug message, the x86 specific version of
memblock reserve/free functions are simple wrappers around the generic
versions - memblock_reserve/free().
This patch adds debug messages with caller identification to the
generic versions and replaces x86 specific ones and kills them.
arch/x86/include/asm/memblock.h and arch/x86/mm/memblock.c are empty
after this change and removed.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1310462166-31469-14-git-send-email-tj@kernel.org
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
1. replace find_e820_area with memblock_find_in_range
2. replace reserve_early with memblock_x86_reserve_range
3. replace free_early with memblock_x86_free_range.
4. NO_BOOTMEM will switch to use memblock too.
5. use _e820, _early wrap in the patch, in following patch, will
replace them all
6. because memblock_x86_free_range support partial free, we can remove some special care
7. Need to make sure that memblock_find_in_range() is called after memblock_x86_fill()
so adjust some calling later in setup.c::setup_arch()
-- corruption_check and mptable_update
-v2: Move reserve_brk() early
Before fill_memblock_area, to avoid overlap between brk and memblock_find_in_range()
that could happen We have more then 128 RAM entry in E820 tables, and
memblock_x86_fill() could use memblock_find_in_range() to find a new place for
memblock.memory.region array.
and We don't need to use extend_brk() after fill_memblock_area()
So move reserve_brk() early before fill_memblock_area().
-v3: Move find_smp_config early
To make sure memblock_find_in_range not find wrong place, if BIOS doesn't put mptable
in right place.
-v4: Treat RESERVED_KERN as RAM in memblock.memory. and they are already in
memblock.reserved already..
use __NOT_KEEP_MEMBLOCK to make sure memblock related code could be freed later.
-v5: Generic version __memblock_find_in_range() is going from high to low, and for 32bit
active_region for 32bit does include high pages
need to replace the limit with memblock.default_alloc_limit, aka get_max_mapped()
-v6: Use current_limit instead
-v7: check with MEMBLOCK_ERROR instead of -1ULL or -1L
-v8: Set memblock_can_resize early to handle EFI with more RAM entries
-v9: update after kmemleak changes in mainline
Suggested-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Suggested-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Ying Huang would like setup_data to be reserved, but not included in the
no save range.
Here we try to modify the e820 table to reserve that range early.
also add that in early_res in case bootloader messes up with the ramdisk.
other solution would be
1. add early_res_to_highmem...
2. early_res_to_e820...
but they could reserve another type memory wrongly, if early_res has some
resource reserved early, and not needed later, but it is not removed from
early_res in time. Like the RAMDISK (already handled).
Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: andi@firstfloor.org
Tested-by: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Add support for overlapping early memory reservations.
In general, they still can't overlap, and will panic
with "Overlapping early reservations" if they do overlap.
But if a memory range is reserved with the new call:
reserve_early_overlap_ok()
rather than with the usual call:
reserve_early()
then subsequent early reservations are allowed to overlap.
This new reserve_early_overlap_ok() call is only used in one
place so far, which is the "BIOS reserved" reservation for the
the EBDA region, which out of Paranoia reserves more than what
the BIOS might have specified, and which thus might overlap with
another legitimate early memory reservation (such as, perhaps,
the EFI memmap.)
Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Cc: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: "Jack Steiner" <steiner@sgi.com>
Cc: "Mike Travis" <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: "Huang
Cc: Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
This patch adds linked list of struct setup_data supported for i386.
Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: andi@firstfloor.org
Cc: mingo@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
This patch extracts the common part of head32.c and head64.c into head.c.
Signed-off-by: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: andi@firstfloor.org
Cc: mingo@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
H. Peter Anvin