Hi,
Bernhard Walle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> @@ -798,12 +798,13 @@ void free_initrd_mem(unsigned long start
> }
> #endif
>
> -void __init reserve_bootmem_generic(unsigned long phys, unsigned len)
> +int __init reserve_bootmem_generic(unsigned long phys, unsigned len, int
> flags)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> int nid, next_nid;
> #endif
> unsigned long pfn = phys >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> + int ret;
>
> if (pfn >= end_pfn) {
> /*
> @@ -811,11 +812,11 @@ void __init reserve_bootmem_generic(unsi
> * firmware tables:
> */
> if (pfn < max_pfn_mapped)
> - return;
> + return -EFAULT;
This seemed to be `just do nothing' behaviour. Wouldn't 0 be more
correct here? Or something else so there is a difference between the
path that does not print a warning (the one below) and the path that
does?
>
> printk(KERN_ERR "reserve_bootmem: illegal reserve %lx %u\n",
> phys, len);
> - return;
> + return -EFAULT;
> }
Hannes
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
