Messages in this thread | | | From | Grant Likely <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 18/28] of: create default early_init_dt_add_memory_arch | Date | Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:33:58 -0500 |
| |
On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 18:09:14 -0500, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com> > > Create a weak version of early_init_dt_add_memory_arch which uses > memblock or is an empty function when memblock is not enabled. This > will unify all architectures except ones with custom memory bank > structs.
Two comments below, but otherwise:
Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c > index 0714dd4..a9dce7a 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c > +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c > @@ -688,6 +688,17 @@ u64 __init dt_mem_next_cell(int s, __be32 **cellp) > return of_read_number(p, s); > } > > +void __init __weak early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size) > +{ > +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK > + base &= PAGE_MASK; > + size &= PAGE_MASK; > + memblock_add(base, size); > +#else > + pr_err("%s: ignoring memory (%llx, %llx)\n", __func__, base, size); > +#endif > +} > +
Can you do it this way instead:
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK void __init __weak early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size) { base &= PAGE_MASK; size &= PAGE_MASK; memblock_add(base, size); } #endif
If the platform doesn't provide an early_init_dt_add_memory_arch() function and it doesn't have a memblock implementation, then the build should outright fail. I don't see a scenario where we would want to successfully build the kernel without a working add memory function.
Also, can you group this function with the common __weak early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch() implementation? It would be good to group all the memblock specific functions together.
g.
| |