>>> On 05.10.16 at 20:30, <julien.gr...@arm.com> wrote:
> On 30/09/2016 02:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 29.09.16 at 23:42, <daniel.ki...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>> +#else
>>> +static void __init free_ebmalloc_unused_mem(void)
>>> +{
>>> +}
>>> +#endif
>>
>> Did you build test this for ARM? The function ought to be unused,
>> as ...
>>
>>> @@ -1251,6 +1301,8 @@ void __init efi_init_memory(void)
>>> } *extra, *extra_head = NULL;
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> + free_ebmalloc_unused_mem();
>>
>> ... the whole function here doesn't get built on ARM.
>>
>> Julien - we're still awaiting your input on general aspects here.
>
> efi_init_memory would need to be called during Xen boot on ARM. I am not
> sure where as I we don't yet have runtime support on ARM.
>
> Other than that, the patch looks good to me.
But that wasn't the question. My goal is to have as little code
inside #ifndef CONFIG_ARM as possible, and hence I'd like to have
as much of this new code as possible outside of such conditionals.
So the question really is whether that alternative approach would
be fine with you, or what problems you might see.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
