On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@mvista.com> wrote:
quoted text
> Hello.
>
> Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>
>>>> I get this warning while compiling for ARM/SA1100:
>>>>
>>>> mm/sparse.c: In function '__section_nr':
>>>> mm/sparse.c:135: warning: 'root' is used uninitialized in this function
>>>>
>>>> With a small patch in fs/proc/meminfo.c, I find that NR_SECTION_ROOTS
>>>> is zero, which certainly explains the warning.
>>>>
>>>> # cat /proc/meminfo
>>>> NR_SECTION_ROOTS=0
>>>> NR_MEM_SECTIONS=32
>>>> SECTIONS_PER_ROOT=512
>>>> SECTIONS_SHIFT=5
>>>> MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS=32
>>>>
>>>
>>> hm, who owns sparsemem nowadays? Nobody identifiable.
>>>
>>> Does it make physical sense to have SECTIONS_PER_ROOT > NR_MEM_SECTIONS?
>>>
>>
>> Well, it'll be about this number on everything using sparsemem extreme:
>>
>> #define SECTIONS_PER_ROOT       (PAGE_SIZE / sizeof (struct mem_section))
>>
>> and with only 32 sections, this is going to give a NR_SECTION_ROOTS value
>> of zero.  I think the calculation of NR_SECTIONS_ROOTS is wrong.
>>
>> #define NR_SECTION_ROOTS        (NR_MEM_SECTIONS / SECTIONS_PER_ROOT)
>>
>> Clearly if we have 1 mem section, we want to have one section root, so
>> I think this division should round up any fractional part, thusly:
>>
>> #define NR_SECTION_ROOTS        ((NR_MEM_SECTIONS + SECTIONS_PER_ROOT - 1)
>> / SECTIONS_PER_ROOT)
>>
>
>  There's DIV_ROUND_UP() macro for this kind of calculation.

Hi,

It tested with my board and working.
Just curious. If NR_SECTION_ROOTS is zero and uninitialized then
what's problem? Since we boot and working without patch.

Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
--
unsubscribe notice
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/