On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 04:08:56PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Tue, 11 Jun 2024 at 15:01, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 12:52:22PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Sughosh, > > > > > > On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 at 12:53, Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > With the move of the LMB structure to a persistent state, there is no > > > > need to declare the variable locally, and pass it as part of the LMB > > > > API's. Remove all local variable instances and change the API's > > > > correspondingly. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.g...@linaro.org> > > > > --- > > > > arch/arc/lib/cache.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/arm/lib/stack.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/arm/mach-apple/board.c | 17 ++- > > > > arch/arm/mach-snapdragon/board.c | 17 ++- > > > > arch/arm/mach-stm32mp/dram_init.c | 7 +- > > > > arch/arm/mach-stm32mp/stm32mp1/cpu.c | 6 +- > > > > arch/m68k/lib/bootm.c | 7 +- > > > > arch/microblaze/lib/bootm.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/mips/lib/bootm.c | 9 +- > > > > arch/nios2/lib/bootm.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/powerpc/cpu/mpc85xx/mp.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/mp.h | 4 +- > > > > arch/powerpc/lib/bootm.c | 14 +- > > > > arch/riscv/lib/bootm.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/sh/lib/bootm.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/x86/lib/bootm.c | 4 +- > > > > arch/xtensa/lib/bootm.c | 4 +- > > > > board/xilinx/common/board.c | 7 +- > > > > boot/bootm.c | 26 ++-- > > > > boot/bootm_os.c | 5 +- > > > > boot/image-board.c | 32 ++--- > > > > boot/image-fdt.c | 29 ++--- > > > > cmd/bdinfo.c | 6 +- > > > > cmd/booti.c | 2 +- > > > > cmd/bootz.c | 2 +- > > > > cmd/load.c | 7 +- > > > > drivers/iommu/apple_dart.c | 7 +- > > > > drivers/iommu/sandbox_iommu.c | 15 +-- > > > > fs/fs.c | 7 +- > > > > include/image.h | 22 +--- > > > > include/lmb.h | 39 +++--- > > > > lib/lmb.c | 81 ++++++------ > > > > net/tftp.c | 5 +- > > > > net/wget.c | 5 +- > > > > test/cmd/bdinfo.c | 2 +- > > > > test/lib/lmb.c | 187 +++++++++++++-------------- > > > > 36 files changed, 270 insertions(+), 333 deletions(-) > > > > > > This isn't necessary...and it will make things harder. You can have a > > > global 'lmb' while still allowing passing a different pointer when > > > needed. > > > > There's only one reservation checking system and list of known > > reservations, keep in mind. > > There is only one driver model, too, but we use a pointer. It makes > tests much easier. > > In fact I see elsewhere in this series that it causes problems with > tests. Best to use a pointer so it is easy to update.
Maybe? I worry that will lead to thinking that we still, like today, have many LMB lists, rather than a single LMB list that everyone must use. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
