Re: [PATCH] mm/sparse: fix BUILD_BUG_ON check for section map alignment

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:30:23 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The comment in mmzone.h states that the alignment requirement
> is the minimum of PAGE_SHIFT and PFN_SECTION_SHIFT. However, the
> pointer arithmetic (mem_map - section_nr_to_pfn()) results in
> a byte offset scaled by sizeof(struct page). Thus, the actual
> alignment provided by the second term is PFN_SECTION_SHIFT +
> __ffs(sizeof(struct page)).
> 
> Update the compile-time check and the mmzone.h comment to
> accurately reflect this mathematically guaranteed alignment by
> taking the minimum of PAGE_SHIFT and PFN_SECTION_SHIFT +
> __ffs(sizeof(struct page)). This avoids the issue of the check
> being overly restrictive on architectures like powerpc where
> PFN_SECTION_SHIFT alone is very small (e.g., 6).
> 
> Also, remove the exhaustive per-architecture bit-width list from the
> comment; such details risk falling out of date over time and may
> inadvertently be left un-updated, while the existing BUILD_BUG_ON
> provides sufficient compile-time verification of the constraint.
> 
> No runtime impact so far: SECTION_MAP_LAST_BIT happens to fit within
> the smaller limit on all existing architectures.

Thanks.  So this can fix the build on some arch/kconfig combinations?

Do you think we should fix older kernels?

> Fixes: def9b71ee651 ("include/linux/mmzone.h: fix explanation of lower bits in the SPARSEMEM mem_map pointer")

Eight years ago so I'm going with "no".