On 08.04.2025 18:07, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> @@ -212,6 +213,39 @@ static int __init process_domain_node(
> else
> printk("PV\n");
> }
> + else if ( strncmp(prop_name, "memory", name_len) == 0 )
> + {
> + uint64_t kb;
> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u64(prop, &kb) != 0 )
Nit (you know what I have to say here, and again below.)
> + {
> + printk(" failed processing memory for domain %s\n", name);
> + return -EINVAL;
Any reason to override fdt_prop_as_u64()'s return value here?
> + }
> + bd->mem_pages = PFN_DOWN(kb * SZ_1K);
> + printk(" memory: %ld kb\n", kb);
> + }
> + else if ( strncmp(prop_name, "mem-min", name_len) == 0 )
> + {
> + uint64_t kb;
> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u64(prop, &kb) != 0 )
> + {
> + printk(" failed processing memory for domain %s\n", name);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + bd->min_pages = PFN_DOWN(kb * SZ_1K);
> + printk(" min memory: %ld kb\n", kb);
> + }
> + else if ( strncmp(prop_name, "mem-max", name_len) == 0 )
> + {
> + uint64_t kb;
> + if ( fdt_prop_as_u64(prop, &kb) != 0 )
> + {
> + printk(" failed processing memory for domain %s\n", name);
All three error messages being identical doesn't help diagnosing issues.
> --- a/xen/include/xen/libfdt/libfdt-xen.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/libfdt/libfdt-xen.h
> @@ -34,6 +34,16 @@ static inline int __init fdt_prop_as_u32(
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static inline int __init fdt_prop_as_u64(
> + const struct fdt_property *prop, uint64_t *val)
> +{
> + if ( !prop || fdt32_to_cpu(prop->len) < sizeof(u64) )
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + *val = fdt_cell_as_u64((fdt32_t *)prop->data);
Please avoid casting away const. Looks like I overlooked this in
fdt_prop_as_u32() that was introduced by an earlier patch.
Jan
