Hi Tom,

On 3/2/21 9:50 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 01:59:07PM +0100, Patrick Delaunay wrote:

Hi,

I propose a update of the lmb library to allow the configuration
with Kconfig of the number of memory and reserved regions in lmb
libary:
- CONFIG_LMB_RESERVED_REGIONS
- CONFIG_LMB_MEMORY_REGIONS

By default, I keep the default value of 8 regions.

This serie avoids issue on stm32mp15 platform,
as the kernel device tree defines many and non contiguous reserved
regions.



Patrick Delaunay (5):
   lmb: move CONFIG_LMB in Kconfig
   lmb: remove lmb_region.size
   lmb: Move lmb property arrays in struct lmb
   lmb: Add 2 config to define the max number of regions
   configs: stm32mp15: increase the number of reserved memory region in
     lmb

  arch/arc/include/asm/config.h        |  2 --
  arch/arm/include/asm/config.h        |  1 -
  arch/m68k/include/asm/config.h       |  1 -
  arch/microblaze/include/asm/config.h |  2 --
  arch/mips/include/asm/config.h       |  1 -
  arch/nds32/include/asm/config.h      |  1 -
  arch/powerpc/include/asm/config.h    |  1 -
  arch/riscv/include/asm/config.h      |  1 -
  arch/sh/include/asm/config.h         |  2 --
  arch/x86/include/asm/config.h        |  1 -
  arch/xtensa/include/asm/config.h     |  2 --
  configs/stm32mp15_basic_defconfig    |  1 +
  configs/stm32mp15_trusted_defconfig  |  1 +
  include/configs/10m50_devboard.h     |  5 ----
  include/configs/3c120_devboard.h     |  5 ----
  include/configs/sandbox.h            |  2 --
  include/configs/x86-common.h         |  2 --
  include/image.h                      |  2 +-
  include/lmb.h                        | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
  lib/Kconfig                          | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
  lib/lmb.c                            | 14 ++++++------
  scripts/config_whitelist.txt         |  1 -
  22 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
This series causes a little bit of size growth everywhere.  It's fatal
on nokia_rx51 (and caught via the test script).  We can bring nokia_rx51
back under size by disabling the optimized memcpy/memset functions, but
that's not ideal.  Can we do your changes here in a more size-concious
way?  Thanks!


Sure, I will check and correct this issue.


Patrick

Reply via email to