From: Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>
To: Andrew Jones <andrew.jones@linux.dev>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Cc: alexandru.elisei@arm.com, eric.auger@redhat.com,
shahuang@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, thuth@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 12/18] arm/arm64: Factor out allocator init from mem_init
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 08:01:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee84ddaa-83cb-42cd-a70e-7f96774a7d99@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240227192109.487402-32-andrew.jones@linux.dev>
On 27/02/2024 19:21, Andrew Jones wrote:
> The allocator init is identical for mem_init() and efi_mem_init().
> Share it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <andrew.jones@linux.dev>
Reviewed-by: Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@arm.com>
Thanks,
Nikos
> ---
> lib/arm/setup.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/arm/setup.c b/lib/arm/setup.c
> index f96ee04ddd68..d0be4c437708 100644
> --- a/lib/arm/setup.c
> +++ b/lib/arm/setup.c
> @@ -136,9 +136,28 @@ static void arm_memregions_add_assumed(void)
> #endif
> }
>
> -static void mem_init(phys_addr_t freemem_start)
> +static void mem_allocator_init(phys_addr_t freemem_start, phys_addr_t freemem_end)
> {
> phys_addr_t base, top;
> +
> + freemem_start = PAGE_ALIGN(freemem_start);
> + freemem_end &= PAGE_MASK;
> +
> + phys_alloc_init(freemem_start, freemem_end - freemem_start);
> + phys_alloc_set_minimum_alignment(SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
> +
> + phys_alloc_get_unused(&base, &top);
> + base = PAGE_ALIGN(base);
> + top &= PAGE_MASK;
> + assert(sizeof(long) == 8 || !(base >> 32));
> + if (sizeof(long) != 8 && (top >> 32) != 0)
> + top = ((uint64_t)1 << 32);
> + page_alloc_init_area(0, base >> PAGE_SHIFT, top >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> + page_alloc_ops_enable();
> +}
> +
> +static void mem_init(phys_addr_t freemem_start)
> +{
> struct mem_region *freemem, *r, mem = {
> .start = (phys_addr_t)-1,
> };
> @@ -169,17 +188,7 @@ static void mem_init(phys_addr_t freemem_start)
> __phys_offset = mem.start; /* PHYS_OFFSET */
> __phys_end = mem.end; /* PHYS_END */
>
> - phys_alloc_init(freemem_start, freemem->end - freemem_start);
> - phys_alloc_set_minimum_alignment(SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
> -
> - phys_alloc_get_unused(&base, &top);
> - base = PAGE_ALIGN(base);
> - top = top & PAGE_MASK;
> - assert(sizeof(long) == 8 || !(base >> 32));
> - if (sizeof(long) != 8 && (top >> 32) != 0)
> - top = ((uint64_t)1 << 32);
> - page_alloc_init_area(0, base >> PAGE_SHIFT, top >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> - page_alloc_ops_enable();
> + mem_allocator_init(freemem_start, freemem->end);
> }
>
> static void freemem_push_fdt(void **freemem, const void *fdt)
> @@ -292,7 +301,6 @@ static efi_status_t efi_mem_init(efi_bootinfo_t *efi_bootinfo)
> struct efi_boot_memmap *map = &(efi_bootinfo->mem_map);
> efi_memory_desc_t *buffer = *map->map;
> efi_memory_desc_t *d = NULL;
> - phys_addr_t base, top;
> struct mem_region r;
> uintptr_t text = (uintptr_t)&_text, etext = ALIGN((uintptr_t)&_etext, 4096);
> uintptr_t data = (uintptr_t)&_data, edata = ALIGN((uintptr_t)&_edata, 4096);
> @@ -380,17 +388,7 @@ static efi_status_t efi_mem_init(efi_bootinfo_t *efi_bootinfo)
>
> assert(sizeof(long) == 8 || free_mem_start < (3ul << 30));
>
> - phys_alloc_init(free_mem_start, free_mem_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT);
> - phys_alloc_set_minimum_alignment(SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
> -
> - phys_alloc_get_unused(&base, &top);
> - base = PAGE_ALIGN(base);
> - top = top & PAGE_MASK;
> - assert(sizeof(long) == 8 || !(base >> 32));
> - if (sizeof(long) != 8 && (top >> 32) != 0)
> - top = ((uint64_t)1 << 32);
> - page_alloc_init_area(0, base >> PAGE_SHIFT, top >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> - page_alloc_ops_enable();
> + mem_allocator_init(free_mem_start, free_mem_start + (free_mem_pages << EFI_PAGE_SHIFT));
>
> return EFI_SUCCESS;
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-04 8:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-27 19:21 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 00/18] arm64: EFI improvements Andrew Jones
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 01/18] runtime: Update MAX_SMP probe Andrew Jones
2024-03-03 21:43 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 02/18] runtime: Add yet another 'no kernel' error message Andrew Jones
2024-03-03 21:50 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 03/18] arm64: efi: Don't create dummy test Andrew Jones
2024-03-03 21:57 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 04/18] arm64: efi: Make running tests on EFI can be parallel Andrew Jones
2024-03-03 22:06 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 05/18] arm64: efi: Remove redundant dtb generation Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:16 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 06/18] arm64: efi: Move run code into a function Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:19 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 07/18] arm64: efi: Remove EFI_USE_DTB Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:20 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 08/18] arm64: efi: Improve device tree discovery Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:34 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-03-04 9:35 ` Andrew Jones
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 09/18] lib/efi: Add support for loading the initrd Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:44 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 10/18] arm64: efi: Allow running tests directly Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:52 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-03-04 9:43 ` Andrew Jones
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 11/18] arm/arm64: Factor out some initial setup Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 7:59 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 12/18] arm/arm64: Factor out allocator init from mem_init Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 8:01 ` Nikos Nikoleris [this message]
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 13/18] arm64: Simplify efi_mem_init Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 8:10 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-03-04 9:55 ` Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 10:01 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 14/18] arm64: Add memregions_efi_init Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 8:16 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 15/18] arm64: efi: Don't map reserved regions Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 8:18 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 16/18] arm64: efi: Fix _start returns from failed _relocate Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 8:58 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 17/18] arm64: efi: Switch to our own stack Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 9:03 ` Nikos Nikoleris
2024-02-27 19:21 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v2 18/18] arm64: efi: Add gitlab CI Andrew Jones
2024-03-04 9:06 ` Nikos Nikoleris
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ee84ddaa-83cb-42cd-a70e-7f96774a7d99@arm.com \
--to=nikos.nikoleris@arm.com \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=andrew.jones@linux.dev \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=shahuang@redhat.com \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox