On 12 February 2016 at 14:27, Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: > From: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com> > > Purely by code inspection, it looks like the parameter order to memalign() > is swapped; its parameters are (align, size). 4096 is a likely desired > alignment, and a variable named size sounds like a size:-) > > Fixes: 45b5a37836d5 ("x86: Add multi-processor init") > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com> > --- > I've taken a quick look at all the other memalign() calls in U-Boot, and > I /think/ they're all correct. > --- > arch/x86/cpu/mp_init.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/cpu/mp_init.c b/arch/x86/cpu/mp_init.c > index 7917350bff26..fc2fb5bf445c 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/cpu/mp_init.c > +++ b/arch/x86/cpu/mp_init.c > @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ static int load_sipi_vector(atomic_t **ap_countp, int num_cpus) > > params->stack_size = CONFIG_AP_STACK_SIZE; > size = params->stack_size * num_cpus; > - stack = memalign(size, 4096); > + stack = memalign(4096, size); > if (!stack) > return -ENOMEM; > params->stack_top = (u32)(stack + size); > -- > 2.7.0 >
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> Thanks. I'm a little surprised this hasn't caused problems with CPU start-up! - Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot