Re: [PATCH 24/40] lmb: add a common implementation of arch_lmb_reserve()

Hi Sughosh, On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 at 02:42, Sughosh Ganu wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 at 05:02, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > Hi Sughosh, > > > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 00:04, Sughosh Ganu wrote: > > > > > > Almost all of the current definitions of arch_lmb_reserve() are doing > > > the same thing

Re: [PATCH 24/40] lmb: add a common implementation of arch_lmb_reserve()

On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 at 05:02, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Sughosh, > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 00:04, Sughosh Ganu wrote: > > > > Almost all of the current definitions of arch_lmb_reserve() are doing > > the same thing. The only exception in a couple of cases is the > > alignment parameter requireme

Re: [PATCH 24/40] lmb: add a common implementation of arch_lmb_reserve()

Hi Sughosh, On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 00:04, Sughosh Ganu wrote: > > Almost all of the current definitions of arch_lmb_reserve() are doing > the same thing. The only exception in a couple of cases is the > alignment parameter requirement. Have a generic weak implementation of > this function, keepin

[PATCH 24/40] lmb: add a common implementation of arch_lmb_reserve()

Almost all of the current definitions of arch_lmb_reserve() are doing the same thing. The only exception in a couple of cases is the alignment parameter requirement. Have a generic weak implementation of this function, keeping the highest value of alignment that is being used(16K). Also, instead o