On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 06:17:25PM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
> >
> >
> > On May 30, 2023, at 9:09 AM, Nikos Nikoleris <nikos.nikoleris@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > +static efi_status_t efi_mem_init(efi_bootinfo_t *efi_bootinfo)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > + unsigned long free_mem_pages = 0;
> > + unsigned long free_mem_start = 0;
> > + struct efi_boot_memmap *map = &(efi_bootinfo->mem_map);
> > + efi_memory_desc_t *buffer = *map->map;
> > + efi_memory_desc_t *d = NULL;
> > + phys_addr_t base, top;
> > + struct mem_region r;
> > + uintptr_t text = (uintptr_t)&_text, etext = __ALIGN((uintptr_t)&_etext, 4096);
> > + uintptr_t data = (uintptr_t)&_data, edata = __ALIGN((uintptr_t)&_edata, 4096);
>
> I am not a fan of the initialization of multiple variables in one line.
>
> But that’s not the issue I am complaining about...
>
> Shouldn't it be ALIGN() instead of __ALIGN() ?
>
Yup.
Thanks,
drew
