On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 02:01:36PM +0100, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Catalin Marinas > <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 17 Sep 2013, at 00:09, Rob Herring <robherring2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c > >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c > >> @@ -147,24 +147,6 @@ static void __init setup_machine_fdt(phys_addr_t dt_phys) > >> pr_info("Machine: %s\n", machine_name); > >> } > >> > >> -void __init early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size) > >> -{ > >> - base &= PAGE_MASK; > >> - size &= PAGE_MASK; > >> - if (base + size < PHYS_OFFSET) { > >> - pr_warning("Ignoring memory block 0x%llx - 0x%llx\n", > >> - base, base + size); > >> - return; > >> - } > >> - if (base < PHYS_OFFSET) { > >> - pr_warning("Ignoring memory range 0x%llx - 0x%llx\n", > >> - base, PHYS_OFFSET); > >> - size -= PHYS_OFFSET - base; > >> - base = PHYS_OFFSET; > >> - } > >> - memblock_add(base, size); > >> -} > >> - > >> /* > >> * Limit the memory size that was specified via FDT. > >> */ > > > > ... > > > >> --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c > >> +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c > >> @@ -688,6 +688,17 @@ u64 __init dt_mem_next_cell(int s, __be32 **cellp) > >> return of_read_number(p, s); > >> } > >> > >> +void __init __weak early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size) > >> +{ > >> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK > >> + base &= PAGE_MASK; > >> + size &= PAGE_MASK; > >> + memblock_add(base, size); > >> +#else > >> + pr_err("%s: ignoring memory (%llx, %llx)\n", __func__, base, size); > >> +#endif > >> +} > > > > Are the arm64 changes equivalent here? There are some safety checks to > > cope with the kernel being loaded at a higher offset than the > > recommended one (PHYS_OFFSET calculated automatically). > > I tried to keep that, but PHYS_OFFSET is not universally defined. My > reasoning is this range checking is hardly specific to an > architecture. Perhaps if memory always starts at 0 you don't need it. > If arm64 really needs these checks, then all architectures do. > > Perhaps "__virt_to_phys(PAGE_OFFSET)" instead of PHYS_OFFSET would work for all? I think virt_to_phys() or __pa() should work, the __virt_to_phys() is only defined by a few architectures. -- Catalin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html