[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 08/10] xen/arm: keep track of reserved-memory regions
Hi Stefano, On 30/04/2019 22:02, Stefano Stabellini wrote: As we parse the device tree in Xen, keep track of the reserved-memory regions as they need special treatment (follow-up patches will make use of the stored information.) Reuse process_memory_node to add reserved-memory regions to the bootinfo.reserved_mem array. Remove the warning if there is no reg in process_memory_node because it is a normal condition for reserved-memory. And it is not a normal condition for /memory... So your argument here is not sufficient for me to not keep the warning here for /memory. Rather than trying to re-purpose process_memory_node, I would prefer if you move out the parsing of "reg" and then provide 2 functions (one for /memory and one for /reserved-memory). The parsing function will return an error if "reg" is not present, but it can be ignored by /reserved-memory and a warning is added for /memory. Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Not done: create an e820-like structure on ARM. Changes in v2: - call process_memory_node from process_reserved_memory_node to avoid duplication --- xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------- xen/include/asm-arm/setup.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c index b6600ab..9355a6e 100644 --- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c +++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c @@ -135,6 +135,8 @@ static int __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, const __be32 *cell; paddr_t start, size; u32 reg_cells = address_cells + size_cells; + struct meminfo *mem; + bool reserved = (bool)data;if ( address_cells < 1 || size_cells < 1 ){ @@ -143,29 +145,39 @@ static int __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, return 0; }+ if ( reserved )+ mem = &bootinfo.reserved_mem; + else + mem = &bootinfo.mem; + prop = fdt_get_property(fdt, node, "reg", NULL); if ( !prop ) - { - printk("fdt: node `%s': missing `reg' property\n", name); return 0; - }cell = (const __be32 *)prop->data;banks = fdt32_to_cpu(prop->len) / (reg_cells * sizeof (u32));- for ( i = 0; i < banks && bootinfo.mem.nr_banks < NR_MEM_BANKS; i++ )+ for ( i = 0; i < banks && mem->nr_banks < NR_MEM_BANKS; i++ ) As I pointed out on v1, this is pretty fragile. While ignoring /memory bank is fine if we have no more space, for /reserved-region this may mean using them in Xen allocator with the consequences we all know. If you split the function properly, then you will be able to treat reserved-regions and memory differently. Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |