[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <234aaac9-d5d0-427f-8666-7f257d385358@spud>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 09:14:44 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To: Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>
CC: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -fixes 2/2] riscv: Do not set initial_boot_params to the
linear address of the dtb
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 10:09:13AM +0200, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
> On 3/27/23 13:16, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 05:33:47PM +0100, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> > > index 542eed85ad2c..a059b73f4ddb 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> > > @@ -278,10 +278,7 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> > > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BUILTIN_DTB)
> > > unflatten_and_copy_device_tree();
> > > #else
> > > - if (early_init_dt_verify(__va(XIP_FIXUP(dtb_early_pa))))
>
> > btw, how come it is safe now to drop this? This feels like a separate
> > change that should be its own commit, no?
>
>
> It is safe because early_init_dt_verify is already called in parse_dtb and
Yah, that's what I figured. Cool.
> since the dtb address does not change anymore, no need to reset
> initial_boot_params. So I'll split this one, thanks.
Worth noting the point at which this became redundant in your commit
message when you do.
Thanks,
Conor.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists