Hi Marek, On 08/15/2012 12:00 AM, Marek Vasut wrote: > Dear Graeme Russ, > >> Hi Marek, >> >> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>> Dear Tomas Hlavacek, >>> >>>> Hello Marek, >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>> So ... we should aim for firing up the real mallocator as soon as >>>>> possible and maybe implement discontigmem (sparsemem) into it, so we >>>>> don't have to bother with relocating pointers maybe? >>>>> >>>>> The only problem I see is platforms where the memory disappears. >>>> >>>> I doubt that on ARM for instance you can set off real mallocator that >>>> early without completely rewriting it. >>> >>> Esp. on ARM, I won't see much of a problem. You usually have some small >>> SRAM where such allocator could run. >>> >>>> The idea of having one complex >>>> mallocator working in the same manner in board_init_f and board_init_r >>>> stages, being able to operate on all platforms using their nifty >>>> memory-management/model features >>> >>> Do you need them? You usually need only a piece of RW memory. >>> >>>> and being seamless to users is really >>>> tempting. But do we need/want to introduce such deep rewrites? >>> >>> Deep rewrites? You'd only need to implement sparsemem into it, which >>> might be list of RW memory areas instead of one memory area. >> >> OK, stop right there (please) - This gets into a highly architecturally >> specific implementations of malloc. Let's not go there OK :) > > Not really, today you give the mallocator one slab of memory on which it > operates ... making it so it'd operate on a list of such slabs shouldn't be > _that_ hard.
When you start throwing around "discontigmem", "sparsemem" and "nifty memory-management/model features" you are talking architecture specifics Regards, Graeme _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
