On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 15:09 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> BTW, is there a particular reason why we need to use
> memblock_enforce_memory_limit() on FSL_BOOK3E, rather than relying on
> memblock_set_current_limit()? I see that when
> memblock_enforce_memory_limit() was added to __early_init_mmu(),
> m
On Wed, 2014-08-06 at 14:58 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 19:48 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> > I'll do s/mmu_allcpus/this_mmu/ but early_init_mmu() needs to do things
> > both before and after early_init_mmu_common(). Do you want two new
> > functions (before and after
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 19:48 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> I'll do s/mmu_allcpus/this_mmu/ but early_init_mmu() needs to do things
> both before and after early_init_mmu_common(). Do you want two new
> functions (before and after) or is it OK to just rename
> early_init_mmu_allcpus() and put a comment
On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 14:36 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 22:07 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>
> >
> > -void __init early_init_mmu(void)
> > -{
> > - __early_init_mmu(1);
> > -}
> > -
> > void early_init_mmu_secondary(void)
> > {
> > - __early_init_mmu(0);
> > +
On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 22:07 -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>
> -void __init early_init_mmu(void)
> -{
> - __early_init_mmu(1);
> -}
> -
> void early_init_mmu_secondary(void)
> {
> - __early_init_mmu(0);
> + early_init_mmu_allcpus();
> }
Small nit, it took me 30s too long to figure out
__early_init_mmu() does some things that are really only needed by the
boot cpu. On FSL booke, This includes calling
memblock_enforce_memory_limit(), which is labelled __init. Secondary
cpu init code can't be __init as that would break CPU hotplug.
While it's probably a bug that memblock_enforce
