On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 10:14 PM Baoquan He <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 01/02/19 at 06:54pm, Kairui Song wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > index 58176b56354e..c8a56f083419 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > > #define pr_fmt(fmt) "AGP: " fmt > > > > #include <linux/kernel.h> > > +#include <linux/kcore.h> > > #include <linux/types.h> > > #include <linux/init.h> > > #include <linux/memblock.h> > > @@ -57,7 +58,7 @@ int fallback_aper_force __initdata; > > > > int fix_aperture __initdata = 1; > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_VMCORE > > +#if defined(CONFIG_PROC_VMCORE) || defined(CONFIG_PROC_KCORE) > > /* > > * If the first kernel maps the aperture over e820 RAM, the kdump kernel > > will > > * use the same range because it will remain configured in the northbridge. > > @@ -66,7 +67,7 @@ int fix_aperture __initdata = 1; > > */ > > static unsigned long aperture_pfn_start, aperture_page_count; > > > > -static int gart_oldmem_pfn_is_ram(unsigned long pfn) > > +static int gart_mem_pfn_is_ram(unsigned long pfn) > > { > > return likely((pfn < aperture_pfn_start) || > > (pfn >= aperture_pfn_start + aperture_page_count)); > > @@ -76,7 +77,12 @@ static void exclude_from_vmcore(u64 aper_base, u32 > > aper_order) > > Shouldn't this function name be changed? It's not only handling vmcore > stuff any more, but also kcore. And this function is not excluding, but > resgistering. > > Other than this, it looks good to me. > > Thanks > Baoquan >
Good suggestion, it's good to change this function name too to avoid any misleading. This patch hasn't got any other reviews recently, I'll update it shortly. -- Best Regards, Kairui Song
