Hi,
On 7/8/19 8:02 PM, Oleksandr wrote:
On 22.06.19 02:56, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
I have tested this series and got the same behavior as with V2 [1].
The "non-reserved-memory" node in my device-tree
(sram@47FFF000->scp_shmem@0) is still interpreted as a "reserved-memory".
I think, this takes place because current implementation iterates over
all device tree nodes starting
from real "reserved-memory" node up to the end of the device tree. And
if there is at least one "non-reserved-memory" node (with a suitable
depth and valid "reg" property)
located down the device tree, it will be mistakenly inserted to
bootinfo.reserved_mem (as in my case).
The problem is because we are passing the depth of the parent. Because
of that, it will look for anything at the same depth (see the check
depth >= min_depth in device_tree_for_each_node).
The correct solution here, would be to use the depth of the child (i.e
depth + 1) when calling device_tree_for_each_node in
process_reserved_memory_node.
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
