[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd7dbd13-724f-0783-51dc-bbd246fa7a13@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 12:41:42 -0800
From: Vijay Balakrishna <vijayb@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: 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
Thanks Pasha.
Catalin, Will,
I can generate a new version with suggested change from Pasha. I'm fine
if you modify.
Thanks,
Vijay
On 3/2/2022 10:15 AM, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> 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