On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 03:40:27PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
The board_init_f() function for am65x is a bit confusing, since it uses the variable name 'pool_addr' to hold a pointer. It then casts it to an address to pass to mem_alloc_init()
Rename the variable and use mapmem to convert to an address.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
(no changes since v1)
arch/arm/mach-k3/am65x/am654_init.c | 11 ++++++----- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-k3/am65x/am654_init.c b/arch/arm/mach-k3/am65x/am654_init.c index a4f038029d7..ddcc1355210 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-k3/am65x/am654_init.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-k3/am65x/am654_init.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
#include <fdt_support.h> #include <init.h> +#include <mapmem.h> #include <asm/global_data.h> #include <asm/io.h> #include <spl.h> @@ -165,7 +166,7 @@ void board_init_f(ulong dummy) #if defined(CONFIG_K3_LOAD_SYSFW) || defined(CONFIG_K3_AM654_DDRSS) struct udevice *dev; size_t pool_size;
- void *pool_addr;
- void *pool; int ret;
#endif /* @@ -204,14 +205,14 @@ void board_init_f(ulong dummy) * malloc pool of which we use all that's left. */ pool_size = CONFIG_VAL(SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN) - gd->malloc_ptr;
- pool_addr = malloc(pool_size);
- if (!pool_addr)
- pool = malloc(pool_size);
- if (!pool) panic("ERROR: Can't allocate full malloc pool!\n");
- mem_malloc_init((ulong)pool_addr, (ulong)pool_size);
- mem_malloc_init(map_to_sysmem(pool), (ulong)pool_size); gd->flags |= GD_FLG_FULL_MALLOC_INIT; debug("%s: initialized an early full malloc pool at 0x%08lx of 0x%lx bytes\n",
__func__, (unsigned long)pool_addr, (unsigned long)pool_size);
__func__, (unsigned long)pool, (unsigned long)pool_size);
- Process pinctrl for the serial0 a.k.a. WKUP_UART0 module and continue
- regardless of the result of pinctrl. Do this without probing the
I'm confused since I thought patch 2 removed the need for doing map_to_sysmem() games more widely. You also forgot to CC anyone from TI that might have comments on if they find "pool" rather than "pool_addr" more or less confusing and given the recent patch from them about what's printed out about memory size, I would think their feedback would be important.