* Re: [PATCH] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map
[not found] <20240428125505.434962-1-skseofh@gmail.com>
@ 2024-05-01 4:59 ` kernel test robot
2024-05-01 13:23 ` [PATCH v2] " skseofh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2024-05-01 4:59 UTC (permalink / raw
To: skseofh, robh, saravanak, rppt
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, devicetree, linux-kernel, Daero Lee
Hi,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on robh/for-next]
[also build test WARNING on linus/master v6.9-rc6 next-20240430]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/skseofh-gmail-com/of-of_reserved_mem-clean-up-reserved-memory-with-no-map/20240430-144643
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/robh/linux.git for-next
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240428125505.434962-1-skseofh%40gmail.com
patch subject: [PATCH] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map
config: arm-defconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240501/202405011208.qsZQwChO-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 14.0.6 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git f28c006a5895fc0e329fe15fead81e37457cb1d1)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240501/202405011208.qsZQwChO-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202405011208.qsZQwChO-lkp@intel.com/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c:95:4: warning: non-void function 'early_init_dt_reserve_memory' should return a value [-Wreturn-type]
return;
^
1 warning generated.
vim +/early_init_dt_reserve_memory +95 drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
80
81 static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
82 phys_addr_t size, bool nomap)
83 {
84 if (nomap) {
85 /*
86 * If the memory is already reserved (by another region), we
87 * should not allow it to be marked nomap, but don't worry
88 * if the region isn't memory as it won't be mapped.
89 */
90 if (memblock_overlaps_region(&memblock.memory, base, size) &&
91 memblock_is_region_reserved(base, size))
92 return -EBUSY;
93
94 if (memblock_mark_nomap(base, size))
> 95 return;
96 }
97 return memblock_reserve(base, size);
98 }
99
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map
2024-05-01 4:59 ` [PATCH] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map kernel test robot
@ 2024-05-01 13:23 ` skseofh
2024-05-22 14:31 ` Rob Herring
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: skseofh @ 2024-05-01 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw
To: lkp
Cc: daero_le.lee, devicetree, linux-kernel, llvm, oe-kbuild-all, robh,
rppt, saravanak, skseofh
From: Daero Lee <daero_le.lee@samsung.com>
In early_init_dt_reserve_memory we only add memory w/o no-map flag to
memblock.reserved. But we need to add memory w/ no-map flag to
memblock.reserved, because NOMAP and memblock.reserved are semantically
different.
Signed-off-by: Daero Lee <daero_le.lee@samsung.com>
---
drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
index 8236ecae2953..d00a17a9cebc 100644
--- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
+++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static void __init fdt_reserved_mem_save_node(unsigned long node, const char *un
static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
phys_addr_t size, bool nomap)
{
+ int err = 0;
if (nomap) {
/*
* If the memory is already reserved (by another region), we
@@ -91,7 +92,10 @@ static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
memblock_is_region_reserved(base, size))
return -EBUSY;
- return memblock_mark_nomap(base, size);
+
+ err = memblock_mark_nomap(base, size);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
}
return memblock_reserve(base, size);
}
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map
2024-05-01 13:23 ` [PATCH v2] " skseofh
@ 2024-05-22 14:31 ` Rob Herring
2024-05-24 9:32 ` DaeRo Lee
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Rob Herring @ 2024-05-22 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw
To: skseofh
Cc: lkp, daero_le.lee, devicetree, linux-kernel, llvm, oe-kbuild-all,
rppt, saravanak
On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 10:23:59PM +0900, skseofh@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Daero Lee <daero_le.lee@samsung.com>
>
> In early_init_dt_reserve_memory we only add memory w/o no-map flag to
> memblock.reserved. But we need to add memory w/ no-map flag to
> memblock.reserved, because NOMAP and memblock.reserved are semantically
> different.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daero Lee <daero_le.lee@samsung.com>
> ---
> drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> index 8236ecae2953..d00a17a9cebc 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static void __init fdt_reserved_mem_save_node(unsigned long node, const char *un
> static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
> phys_addr_t size, bool nomap)
> {
> + int err = 0;
> if (nomap) {
> /*
> * If the memory is already reserved (by another region), we
> @@ -91,7 +92,10 @@ static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
> memblock_is_region_reserved(base, size))
> return -EBUSY;
>
> - return memblock_mark_nomap(base, size);
> +
> + err = memblock_mark_nomap(base, size);
The last time this was touched, it was to make the handling aligned with
EFI memory map handling. Is that still going to be the case with this
change? Or does EFI memory map handling have the same issue?
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> }
> return memblock_reserve(base, size);
> }
> --
> 2.25.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map
2024-05-22 14:31 ` Rob Herring
@ 2024-05-24 9:32 ` DaeRo Lee
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: DaeRo Lee @ 2024-05-24 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Rob Herring
Cc: lkp, daero_le.lee, devicetree, linux-kernel, llvm, oe-kbuild-all,
rppt, saravanak
2024년 5월 22일 (수) 오후 11:31, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>님이 작성:
>
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 10:23:59PM +0900, skseofh@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: Daero Lee <daero_le.lee@samsung.com>
> >
> > In early_init_dt_reserve_memory we only add memory w/o no-map flag to
> > memblock.reserved. But we need to add memory w/ no-map flag to
> > memblock.reserved, because NOMAP and memblock.reserved are semantically
> > different.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daero Lee <daero_le.lee@samsung.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c | 6 +++++-
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> > index 8236ecae2953..d00a17a9cebc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c
> > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static void __init fdt_reserved_mem_save_node(unsigned long node, const char *un
> > static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
> > phys_addr_t size, bool nomap)
> > {
> > + int err = 0;
> > if (nomap) {
> > /*
> > * If the memory is already reserved (by another region), we
> > @@ -91,7 +92,10 @@ static int __init early_init_dt_reserve_memory(phys_addr_t base,
> > memblock_is_region_reserved(base, size))
> > return -EBUSY;
> >
> > - return memblock_mark_nomap(base, size);
> > +
> > + err = memblock_mark_nomap(base, size);
>
> The last time this was touched, it was to make the handling aligned with
> EFI memory map handling. Is that still going to be the case with this
> change? Or does EFI memory map handling have the same issue?
Can I get more information about EFI memory map handling that you're saying?
1) Are you talking about uefi_mem in the reserved-memory node like below?
ex) arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi
uefi_mem: memory@9f800000 {
reg = <0 0x9f800000 0 0x800000>;
no-map;
};
2) Or, about handling EFI memory map function efi_init() -> reserve_regions()?
>
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > }
> > return memblock_reserve(base, size);
> > }
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-05-24 9:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20240428125505.434962-1-skseofh@gmail.com>
2024-05-01 4:59 ` [PATCH] of: of_reserved_mem: clean-up reserved memory with no-map kernel test robot
2024-05-01 13:23 ` [PATCH v2] " skseofh
2024-05-22 14:31 ` Rob Herring
2024-05-24 9:32 ` DaeRo Lee
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).