Hi Sughosh, On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 at 00:04, Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> 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, keeping the highest value of alignment that is being > used(16K). > > Also, instead of using the current value of stack pointer for starting > the reserved region, have a fixed value, considering the stack size > config value. > > Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> > --- > Changes since rfc: None > > arch/arc/lib/cache.c | 14 -------------- > arch/arm/lib/stack.c | 14 -------------- > arch/m68k/lib/bootm.c | 17 ----------------- > arch/microblaze/lib/bootm.c | 14 -------------- > arch/mips/lib/bootm.c | 15 --------------- > arch/nios2/lib/bootm.c | 13 ------------- > arch/powerpc/lib/bootm.c | 13 +++---------- > arch/riscv/lib/bootm.c | 13 ------------- > arch/sh/lib/bootm.c | 13 ------------- > arch/x86/lib/bootm.c | 18 ------------------ > arch/xtensa/lib/bootm.c | 13 ------------- > lib/lmb.c | 6 +++++- > 12 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 155 deletions(-)
How about not having a weak function? I have to wonder whether powerpc really needs to be different? If it does, I suppose we could use an event to deal with powerpc. Regards, Simon
