On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 12:30, Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodi...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Thu May 1, 2025 at 3:02 PM EEST, Sughosh Ganu wrote: > > There is no need to have two separate API's for freeing up memory. Use > > a single API lmb_free() to achieve this. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> > > --- > > [...] > > > -long lmb_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_size_t size); > > +long lmb_free(phys_addr_t base, phys_size_t size, u32 flags); > > Since you are changing this, why does it have to remain a long? It can just > be an int
Sure, I will change it. > > > > > void lmb_dump_all(void); > > void lmb_dump_all_force(void); > > diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c b/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c > > index 73e1eef5011..fd6aee21d36 100644 > > --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c > > +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c > > @@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ efi_status_t efi_allocate_pages(enum efi_allocate_type > > type, > > [...] > > This will lead to a small size increase. > Can you check the size before/after this patchset since you are removing a > bunch of funtions anyway? I did run the size check script from Tom, and while there is an increase in size (~300 odd bytes), this patch is not contributing to the increase. -sughosh > > Thanks > /Ilias
