Re: [PATCH 5/6] x86: Fixup code testing if a pfn is direct mapped

[Yinghai Lu]

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Update code that previously assumed pfns [ 0 - max_low_pfn_mapped ) and
> [ 4GB - max_pfn_mapped ) were always direct mapped, to now look up
> pfn_mapped ranges instead.

please swap patch 5 and patch 4 applying sequence.

aka.
should have
[PATCH 4/6] x86:Fixup code testing if a pfn is direct mapped
and it should have dummy function

bool pfn_range_is_mapped(u64 start_pfn, u64 end_pfn)
{
               return  end_pfn <= max_low_pfn_mapped
                   || (end_pfn > (1UL << (32 - PAGE_SHIFT))
                       && end_pfn <= max_pfn_mapped);
}

and

[PATCH 5/6] x86: Only direct map addresses that are marked as E820_RAM
will update pfn_range_is_mapped accordingly.

Thanks

Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/