On Sun, Jun 14 2026, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Fri, 05 Jun 2026 20:34:47 +0200, Pratyush Yadav <[email protected]> > wrote: >> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h >> index 5afcd99aa8c1..546d7ef798b8 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h >> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h >> @@ -618,7 +619,7 @@ bool memblock_is_kho_scratch_memory(phys_addr_t addr); >> static inline enum migratetype kho_scratch_migratetype(unsigned long pfn, >> enum migratetype mt) >> { >> - if (memblock_is_kho_scratch_memory(PFN_PHYS(pfn))) >> + if (kho_scratch_overlap(PFN_PHYS(pfn), pageblock_nr_pages << >> PAGE_SHIFT)) > > I'd move it to kexec_handover.h and kill > memblock_is_kho_scratch_memory() in the same patch > > BTW, please double check that the extended scratch does not require > updates to efi_init()::reserve_regions().
It does not. efi_init() happens in setup_arch() on both x86 and arm64. The extended scratch is discovered after setup_arch(), in mm_core_init_early(). But I do think this is worth a comment since the interaction is not obvious at all. -- Regards, Pratyush Yadav
