Sure, I will got with B with clear comment.
Thanks,
Jonathan
On 6/5/2015 2:23 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jun, at 05:09:14PM, Zhang, Jonathan Zhixiong wrote:
Thank you for the feedback, Matt.
Given that IA64 does not set EFI_MEMMAP, it appears to me there
are following options:
A. Keep status quota and copy x86's efi_mem_attributes() code
to arm64.
Let's avoid this option.
B. In efi subsystem, provide week default efi_mem_attributes().
In the mean time, IA64 continues to have its own implementation.
While I'm not a huge fan of using __weak this makes the most sense to me
because the alternative is to rename either the ia64 or x86
implementation and that just seems silly.
C. Add EFI_MEMMAP support (and related bits) in IA64.
C. isn't an option because the ia64 memory map doesn't work the same way
as x86 and arm64.
Which option do you prefer? Once there is a consensus, I am
willing to submit patch accordingly for review.
Let's go with B. but please provide a comment above the weak
implementation explaining *why* it's declared as weak and that any new
architecture probably doesn't want to override it. Explain that the ia64
EFI memory map is special.
--
Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
