mirror of
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
synced 2024-09-04 09:59:32 +00:00
s390/setup: avoid using memblock_enforce_memory_limit
[ Upstream commit 5dbc4cb466
]
There is a difference in how architectures treat "mem=" option. For some
that is an amount of online memory, for s390 and x86 this is the limiting
max address. Some memblock api like memblock_enforce_memory_limit()
take limit argument and explicitly treat it as the size of online memory,
and use __find_max_addr to convert it to an actual max address. Current
s390 usage:
memblock_enforce_memory_limit(memblock_end_of_DRAM());
yields different results depending on presence of memory holes (offline
memory blocks in between online memory). If there are no memory holes
limit == max_addr in memblock_enforce_memory_limit() and it does trim
online memory and reserved memory regions. With memory holes present it
actually does nothing.
Since we already use memblock_remove() explicitly to trim online memory
regions to potential limit (think mem=, kdump, addressing limits, etc.)
drop the usage of memblock_enforce_memory_limit() altogether. Trimming
reserved regions should not be required, since we now use
memblock_set_current_limit() to limit allocations and any explicit memory
reservations above the limit is an actual problem we should not hide.
Reviewed-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
b6d5c4e3fc
commit
efc562ea9d
1 changed files with 0 additions and 3 deletions
|
@ -816,9 +816,6 @@ static void __init setup_memory(void)
|
|||
storage_key_init_range(start, end);
|
||||
|
||||
psw_set_key(PAGE_DEFAULT_KEY);
|
||||
|
||||
/* Only cosmetics */
|
||||
memblock_enforce_memory_limit(memblock_end_of_DRAM());
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static void __init relocate_amode31_section(void)
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue