Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: let set_memory_xx(addr, 0) succeed.
From: David Rientjes
Date: Mon Jan 25 2016 - 21:34:15 EST
On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, Laura Abbott wrote:
> On 01/23/2016 07:05 AM, mika.penttila@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Mika PenttilÃ <mika.penttila@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > This makes set_memory_xx() consistent with x86.
> > Signed-off-by: Mika PenttilÃ mika.penttila@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c b/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> > index 3571c73..52220dd 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/pageattr.c
> > @@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ static int change_memory_common(unsigned long addr, int
> > numpages,
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> > }
> > + if (!numpages)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > if (start < MODULES_VADDR || start >= MODULES_END)
> > return -EINVAL;
> I think this is going to conflict with Ard's patch
> Can you rebase on top of that?
Also, I think patch 2 and 3 can be folded together since the change is the
same to both functions.
I think the changelog should be expanded to explain that
charge_memory_common() with numpages == 0 should be a no-op.
When both of those are done, and it's rebased as requested, feel free to
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>