On 7/11/22 13:58, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> 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.
>
/me nods.
I've removed the old code in this patch and replace with the latter block for
v7.
