Message-ID: <4A4A25B1.5010102@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:48:17 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se>
CC: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
       Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
       Grant Grundler <grundler@parisc-linux.org>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG 2.6.31-rc1] HIGHMEM64G causes hang in PCI init on 32-bit
 x86
References: <200906261559.n5QFxJH8027336@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>	<19013.29264.623540.275538@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>	<4A45A5C1.5080701@zytor.com>	<19013.59956.144640.331854@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>	<20090629022911.GC20297@lackof.org>	<4A484A8A.9020704@zytor.com>	<19016.41349.636663.515540@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>	<20090629112155.GJ5480@parisc-linux.org>	<19016.44061.600652.676183@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>	<4A490804.3040609@zytor.com>	<4A494478.7020304@kernel.org>	<4A494E3C.70304@kernel.org>	<4A495C0D.2020807@zytor.com>	<4A4966EF.6010809@kernel.org>	<alpine.LFD.2.01.0906291820060.3605@localhost.localdomain>	<4A496D4B.3040608@kernel.org> <19017.53428.834539.389495@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>
In-Reply-To: <19017.53428.834539.389495@pilspetsen.it.uu.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1824
Lines: 50

Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> 
> Thanks, 2.6.31-rc1 vanilla (which didn't boot) plus this one does boot.
> /proc/iomem now looks as follows:
> 

... as it should.  So far so good, and this is a real problem.

However, there is something that really bothers me: *why does this help
on Mikael's system, which is PAE and therefore has a 64-bit
resource_size_t*?  This whole patch should be a no-op!  There is still
something that doesn't make sense.

The use of "unsigned long" in ram_alignment() will overflow after 2^52
bytes, but again, that's not the issue here, since the highest "start"
value we have is (0x2 << 32).

By process of elimination, the culprit must be round_up(), which reveals
that the macro definition of round_up() has a *very* sublte behavior
with mixed types:

#define round_up(x, y) (((x) + (y) - 1) & ~((y) - 1))

ram_alignment() returns unsigned long, which becomes (y).  This means
that the mask word on the right hand of the & gets truncated to 32 bits
*before* the masking happens -- since ((y) - 1) is still unsigned long,
inverting it will not set bits [63..32] to on.

I think this macro is actively dangerous.  Better would be:

({ __typeof__(x) __mask = (y)-1;  ((x)+__mask) & ~__mask; })

... which is also multiple-inclusion-free at the cost of using gcc
({...}) constructs.

The deep irony in this is that in our particular case is perhaps that
align_up(x,y)-1 is the same thing as x | (y-1) which would have avoided
the problem...

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/