[U-Boot] [PATCH 07/10] ARM: tegra: fix malloc region sizing

[Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>]

On 09/08/2015 02:56 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 08, 2015 at 02:52:06PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 09/08/2015 02:45 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
>>> On 09/08/2015 09:53 AM, Tom Warren wrote:
>>>> Stephen,
>>>> 
>>>> Stephen Warren wrote at Friday, September 04, 2015 9:04 PM:
>>>>> From: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Commit 52a7c98a1772 "tegra-common: increase malloc pool len
>>>>> by dfu mmc file buffer size" updated the definition of
>>>>> CONFIG_SYS_MALLOC_LEN for Tegra to take account of the DFU
>>>>> buffer size. However, this change had no effect, since 
>>>>> typical Tegra board config headers don't set the DFU-
>>>>> related defines until after tegra-common.h is included. Fix
>>>>> this by moving the affected conditional code to 
>>>>> tegra-common-post.h, which is included last. Also move the
>>>>> definition of SYS_NONCACHED_MEMORY since it's a related and
>>>>> adjacent definition.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fix the condition to test for the DFU feature, rather than
>>>>> specifically MMC DFU support, so it applies in all cases.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
>>>> 
>>>> Do you want me to take these last four in to u-boot-tegra for
>>>> the pending PR, or do you expect them to go in another way?
>>> 
>>> I believe the 4 "ARM: tegra:" patches can go through the Tegra
>>> tree since they're independent from the other patches in the
>>> series. Thanks.
>> 
>> I note that Lukasz has ack'd all the other patches, so perhaps
>> you can just take the whole series through the Tegra tree? At
>> least the DFU patches since he's maintainer there. Perhaps TomR
>> can ack the ext4 patches since they don't seem to have a
>> maintainer.
> 
> I think I snagged them all in patchwork for myself.  Do the Tegra
> ones depend on anything else?

I don't believe the Tegra patches depend on anything to compile or
run; they're just all conceptually related to DFU support on Tegra.