[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+CK2bDbbx=8R=UthkMesWOST8eJMtOGJdfMRTFSwVmo0Vn0EA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 13:15:03 -0500
From: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
To: Vijay Balakrishna <vijayb@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: Do not defer reserve_crashkernel() for
platforms with no DMA memory zones
Hi Vijay,
The patch looks good to me, just one nit below.
> -phys_addr_t arm64_dma_phys_limit __ro_after_init;
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ZONE_DMA) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ZONE_DMA32)
> +phys_addr_t __ro_after_init arm64_dma_phys_limit;
> +#else
> +phys_addr_t __ro_after_init arm64_dma_phys_limit = PHYS_MASK + 1;
Since in this case arm64_dma_phys_limit is initialized during
declaration, it would make sense to use const instead of
__ro_after_init. Consider changing the above to this:
const phys_addr_t arm64_dma_phys_limit = PHYS_MASK + 1;
Reviewed-by: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
Thank you,
Pasha
Powered by blists - more mailing lists