Hi Jean-Jacques, On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 08:41, Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com> wrote: > > > On 30/10/2019 02:48, Simon Glass wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 10:15, Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com> wrote: > >> Add managed functions to get a reset_ctl from the device-tree, based on a > >> name or an index. > >> Also add a managed functions to get a reset_ctl_bulk (array of reset_ctl) > >> from the device-tree. > >> > >> When the device is unbound, the reset controllers are automatically > >> released and the data structure is freed. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot <jjhib...@ti.com> > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/reset/reset-uclass.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >> include/reset.h | 135 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >> 2 files changed, 247 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > > I really don't like these ERR_PTR returns. I suppose they make the > > code easier to port, and we can be sure that pointers will not be in > > the last 4KB of address space? > > It seems rather unlikely because the returned pointer points to actual > RAM allocated from the heap. On most platforms I've worked with, the top > of the address space is not dedicated to memory.
Yes that's my comfort. > If ever the need to fix > this arises it could done by tweaking the macros to use another unused > address space. Not easily without doing something platform-specific, as someone else is currently pushing. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
