Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 09 Sep 2012 13:33:38 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: mtd: kernel BUG at arch/x86/mm/pat.c:279! |
| |
On 09/09/2012 12:04 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Sun, 2012-09-09 at 09:56 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> >>> So it should either be start=0xfffffffffffff000 end=0xffffffffffffffff >>> or it should be start=0xfffffffffffff000 len=0x1000. >> >> I would strongly object to the former; that kind of inclusive ranges >> breed a whole class of bugs by themselves. > > Another alternative that avoids overflow issues is to use a PFN rather > than a byte address. >
Except as a result of that logic have a bunch of places which either have rounding errors in how they calculate PFNs, or they think they can stick PFNs into 32-bit numbers. :(
-hpa
-- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
| |