On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 at 22:05, Frank van der Linden wrote:
>
> Meanwhile, it seems that this issue was already addressed in:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211215021348.8766-1-kernelf...@gmail.com/
>
> ..which has now been pulled in, and sent to stable@ for 5.15. I
> somehow missed that
Meanwhile, it seems that this issue was already addressed in:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211215021348.8766-1-kernelf...@gmail.com/
..which has now been pulled in, and sent to stable@ for 5.15. I
somehow missed that message, and sent my change in a few weeks
later.
The fix to just reserve the
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 07:33:11PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 08:44:41PM +, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:31:58PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > @@ -481,6
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 12:10:46AM +, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> Thanks for discussing this further! I tried the above change, although
> I wrapped it in an if (cap_mem_size != 0), so that a normal kernel
> doesn't get its entire memory marked as reserved.
Just to clarify: I had to do that
On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 07:33:11PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 08:44:41PM +, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:31:58PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > > @@ -481,6
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 08:44:41PM +, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:31:58PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > @@ -481,6 +481,8 @@ phys_addr_t memblock_reserved_size(void);
> > > phys_addr_t
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 08:44:41PM +, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:31:58PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > > @@ -481,6 +481,8 @@ phys_addr_t memblock_reserved_size(void);
> > > phys_addr_t
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 12:31:58PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
> > @@ -481,6 +481,8 @@ phys_addr_t memblock_reserved_size(void);
> > phys_addr_t memblock_start_of_DRAM(void);
> > phys_addr_t memblock_end_of_DRAM(void);
> >
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 09:08:07PM +, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> Some architectures might limit the usable memory range based
> on a firmware property, like "linux,usable-memory-range"
> for ARM crash kernels. This limit needs to be enforced after
> firmware memory map processing has been
