On 03/01/2016 07:47 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 10:02 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> On Wed, 2016-10-02 at 17:13:29 UTC, Nathan Fontenot wrote: >>> Now that the DLPAR add/remove flow updates the ibm,dynamic-memory device >>> tree property each time we add or remove a LMB the work needed to clone >>> this property can be reduced. >>> >>> Prior to performing any memory DLPAR operation we now clone the device >>> tree property once and convert it to cpu format. This copy is then used >>> to walk through LMBs as we process them and is thrown away when we >>> are finished. There is no longer a need to convert the entire property to >>> cpu format and then back to BE every time we update it, we can just parse >>> it in its native BE format and update the one LMB we need to modify >>> before updating the property. >>> >>> This patch removes the BE => cpu conversion step in the clone routine and >>> creates a drconf_property_to_cpu() routine to make this conversion for the >>> one time we need to convert the entire property. This then allows us >>> to remove dlpar_update_drconf_property() since we can now do everything >>> in dlpar_update_device_tree_lmb(). >> >> Hi Nathan, >> >> This sounds like a good cleanup on the face of it. >> >> But even with it applied I still see a boat load of endian errors from sparse >> in this file. That worries me, can you please try and fix them. > > I can merge patches 1 and 2 if you like, and leave this one for you to fixup? > Or I can just wait for a v2 of the whole series. Let me know which you'd > prefer. >
If you don't mind merging patches 1 and 2 I will send out a new cleanup patch to fix the issues with patch 3 of the series. Thanks, -Nathan _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
