On 06/18/2018 04:08 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Add some more verbose debugging when doing memory allocations. This might help to find bugs later.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
Changes in v8: None Changes in v7: None Changes in v6: None Changes in v5: None Changes in v4: None Changes in v3: None Changes in v2: None
lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c index aefafc3fba..2a41eb13aa 100644 --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c @@ -315,8 +315,12 @@ static efi_status_t EFIAPI efi_allocate_pages_ext(int type, int memory_type, map_to_sysmem((void *)(uintptr_t)*memory); else addr = 0;
- debug(" input ptr %lx, addr %lx\n", (unsigned long)*memory,
(unsigned long)addr);- debug("* output addr %lx, ptr %lx\n", (unsigned long)addr,
(unsigned long)*memory);
2 nits:
1) On input, *memory is addr, on output *memory is ptr. I don't quite understand what the "addr" part above is supposed to do, but I'm fairly sure it's just remainders of some previous (incorrect) patch.
2) Please don't put any debugging into _ext functions. I introduced them before we had EFI_CALL() which is a much better API for calling EFI functions. So sooner or later we'll probably get rid of _ext functions altogether and instead just call the EFI functions using EFI_CALL(). We'd lose all debugging output then.
return EFI_EXIT(r); }
@@ -364,11 +368,25 @@ static efi_status_t EFIAPI efi_get_memory_map_ext( uint32_t *descriptor_version)
Same comment about _ext functions here.
{ efi_status_t r;
int i, entries;
EFI_ENTRY("%p, %p, %p, %p, %p", memory_map_size, memory_map, map_key, descriptor_size, descriptor_version); r = efi_get_memory_map(memory_map_size, memory_map, map_key, descriptor_size, descriptor_version);
entries = *memory_map_size / sizeof(struct efi_mem_desc);
debug(" memory_map_size=%zx (%lx entries)\n", *memory_map_size,
(ulong)(*memory_map_size / sizeof(struct efi_mem_desc)));if (memory_map) {
for (i = 0; i < entries; i++) {struct efi_mem_desc *desc = &memory_map[i];debug(" type %d, phys %lx, virt %lx, num_pages %lx, attribute %lx\n",desc->type, (ulong)desc->physical_start,(ulong)desc->virtual_start,(ulong)desc->num_pages, (ulong)desc->attribute);}} return EFI_EXIT(r); }
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c b/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c index ad61b723e6..856caa4a40 100644 --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c @@ -149,6 +149,24 @@ static s64 efi_mem_carve_out(struct efi_mem_list *map, return EFI_CARVE_LOOP_AGAIN; }
+static void efi_mem_print(const char *name) +{
- struct list_head *lhandle;
- debug(" %s: memory map\n", name);
- list_for_each(lhandle, &efi_mem) {
struct efi_mem_list *lmem = list_entry(lhandle,struct efi_mem_list, link);
Are you sure the compiler is smart enough to optimize out the list walking in the debug case?
Alex
struct efi_mem_desc *desc = &lmem->desc;debug(" type %d, phys %lx, virt %lx, num_pages %lx, attribute %lx\n",desc->type, (ulong)desc->physical_start,(ulong)desc->virtual_start, (ulong)desc->num_pages,(ulong)desc->attribute);- }
- debug("\n");
+}
- uint64_t efi_add_memory_map(uint64_t start, uint64_t pages, int memory_type, bool overlap_only_ram) {
@@ -237,6 +255,7 @@ uint64_t efi_add_memory_map(uint64_t start, uint64_t pages, int memory_type,
/* And make sure memory is listed in descending order */ efi_mem_sort();
efi_mem_print(__func__);
return start; }
@@ -453,7 +472,8 @@ efi_status_t efi_get_memory_map(efi_uintn_t *memory_map_size, map_entries++;
map_size = map_entries * sizeof(struct efi_mem_desc);
debug("%s: map_size %lx, provided_map_size %lx\n", __func__,
(ulong)map_size, (ulong)provided_map_size);*memory_map_size = map_size;
if (provided_map_size < map_size)