Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 Jan 2015 19:44:40 -0800 | From | Darren Hart <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Add Isolated Memory Regions for Quark X1000 |
| |
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 03:11:35PM +0000, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > > >Suggest to split the imr_del() into 2 functions:- > >(1) by address + size > >(2) by IMR index > >At current implementation, it does not support (2) only because it fails at > >imr_check_range(). > > Hi Boon Leong. > > I'll have a think about that :) > > Just on imr_del() though, it does support removal by way of index. > > +static void __init intel_galileo_imr_init(void) > +{ > + unsigned long base = virt_to_phys(&_text); > + unsigned long size = virt_to_phys(&_sinittext) - base - IMR_ALIGN; > + int i, ret; > + > + /* Tear down all existing unlocked IMRs */ > + for (i = 0; i <= QUARK_X1000_IMR_NUM; i++) > + imr_del(i, 0, 0); > > That's what the platform code has to do for every unlocked IMR, to make sure > there are no stale IMRs left that could conflict with the EFI memory map !
I'm OK with a single function so long as by index works without having to specify the address. Please update the kernel doc to describe this usage though.
-- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center
| |