WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-ppc-devel

Re: [XenPPC] [PATCH 3 of 4] [PATCH] Move flat device tree construction f


On Jan 16, 2007, at 10:05 AM, Ryan Harper wrote:

* Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx> [2007-01-15 20:44]:
On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 21:29 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote:
On Jan 15, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Hollis Blanchard wrote:

On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 17:25 -0500, Jimi Xenidis wrote:
+int make_devtree(
[snip]
Any ideas what this reservation is for? is it for the flat- devtree
itself?

Nope.

+    /* root.reserve(0x1000000, 0x1000) */
+    val[0] = cpu_to_be64((u64) 0x1000000);
+    val[1] = cpu_to_be64((u64) 0x1000);
+    ft_add_rsvmap(root, val[0], val[1]);

Yes, it is: see DEVTREE_ADDR in xc_linux_build.c .
so we can lose it, right?

You should know: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch? id=5043 :)

Yes, we can remove it.

Even though we aren't making the tree in python we are still loading it
at DEVTREE_ADDR no?  Why don't we need it?

First off, the length is bogus.
The reservation list is to let the OS know immediately what memory the devtree and all it references are occupying. However the devtree's header contains the real devtree size and the domain is given its location. So the reservation entry is really redundant and makes relocating the devtree to an arbitrary location in memory more difficult.


_______________________________________________
Xen-ppc-devel mailing list
Xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>