hi Simon,
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 17:09, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Sughosh,
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 10:27, Sughosh Ganu sughosh.ganu@linaro.org wrote:
hi Simon,
On Sat, 13 Jul 2024 at 20:45, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Sughosh,
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 at 08:36, Sughosh Ganu sughosh.ganu@linaro.org wrote:
Allow for resizing of LMB regions if the region attributes match. The current code returns a failure status on detecting an overlapping address. This worked up until now since the LMB calls were not persistent and global -- the LMB memory map was specific and private to a given caller of the LMB API's.
With the change in the LMB code to make the LMB reservations persistent, there needs to be a check on whether the memory region can be resized, and then do it if so. To distinguish between memory that cannot be resized, add a new flag, LMB_NOOVERWRITE. Reserving a region of memory with this attribute would indicate that the region cannot be resized.
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu sughosh.ganu@linaro.org
Changes since V1:
- Do the check for the region flags in lmb_resize_regions() and lmb_merge_overlap_regions() to decide on merging the overlapping regions.
include/lmb.h | 1 + lib/lmb.c | 116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 2 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/lmb.h b/include/lmb.h index 069c6af2a3..99fcf5781f 100644 --- a/include/lmb.h +++ b/include/lmb.h @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ enum lmb_flags { LMB_NONE = 0x0, LMB_NOMAP = 0x4,
LMB_NOOVERWRITE = 0x8,How about LMB_PERSIST ?
Isn't LMB_NOOVERWRITE more suitable here ? I mean this is indicating that the said region of memory is not to be re-used/re-requested.
These could be adjusted to use BIT()
I am changing these to use the BIT macro in a subsequent commit.
Yes, I saw that later and forgot to remove this. Normally we make refactoring changes before adding new code, though.
Okay, I will bring in that patch earlier in the series.
-sughosh
[..]
Regards, Simon