On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 16:21:07 +0100
Joao Martins <joao.m.mart...@oracle.com> wrote:
> On 7/7/22 14:05, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 17:10:11 +0100
> > Joao Martins <joao.m.mart...@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This in preparation to allow pc_pci_hole64_start() to be called early
> >> in pc_memory_init(), handle CXL memory region end when its underlying
> >> memory region isn't yet initialized.
> >>
> >> Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.came...@huawei.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Joao Martins <joao.m.mart...@oracle.com>
> >> ---
> >> hw/i386/pc.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c
> >> index 8655cc3b8894..d6dff71012ab 100644
> >> --- a/hw/i386/pc.c
> >> +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c
> >> @@ -857,6 +857,19 @@ static uint64_t pc_get_cxl_range_end(PCMachineState
> >> *pcms)
> >> start = fw->mr.addr + memory_region_size(&fw->mr);
> >> }
> >> }
> >> + } else {
> >
> >
> >> + hwaddr cxl_size = MiB;
> >> +
> >> + start = pc_get_cxl_range_start(pcms);
> >> + if (pcms->cxl_devices_state.fixed_windows) {
> >> + GList *it;
> >> +
> >> + start = ROUND_UP(start + cxl_size, 256 * MiB);
> >> + for (it = pcms->cxl_devices_state.fixed_windows; it; it =
> >> it->next) {
> >> + CXLFixedWindow *fw = it->data;
> >> + start += fw->size;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >
> > /me wondering if this can replace block above that supposedly does
> > the same only using initialized cxl memory regions?
> >
>
> I was thinking about the same thing as of writing.
>
> If the calculation returns the same values might as well just replace it
> as opposed to branching out similar logic.
Let's drop not needed code, so reader won't have to wonder why
the same thing is done in 2 different ways.
>
> I can do that in v7.
>
