Hi Stefano,
On 12/08/2019 23:28, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
Improve early_print_info to also print the banks saved in
bootinfo.reserved_mem. Print them right after RESVD, increasing the same
index.
Since we are at it, also switch the existing RESVD print to use unsigned
int.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefa...@xilinx.com>
---
Changes in v5:
- switch to unsigned
Changes in v4:
- new patch
---
xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
index 0b0e22a3d0..32153e6207 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c
@@ -337,9 +337,10 @@ static int __init early_scan_node(const void *fdt,
static void __init early_print_info(void)
{
struct meminfo *mi = &bootinfo.mem;
+ struct meminfo *mem_resv = &bootinfo.reserved_mem;
struct bootmodules *mods = &bootinfo.modules;
struct bootcmdlines *cmds = &bootinfo.cmdlines;
- int i, nr_rsvd;
+ unsigned int i, j, nr_rsvd;
for ( i = 0; i < mi->nr_banks; i++ )
printk("RAM: %"PRIpaddr" - %"PRIpaddr"\n",
@@ -361,9 +362,15 @@ static void __init early_print_info(void)
continue;
/* fdt_get_mem_rsv returns length */
e += s;
- printk(" RESVD[%d]: %"PRIpaddr" - %"PRIpaddr"\n",
+ printk(" RESVD[%u]: %"PRIpaddr" - %"PRIpaddr"\n",
i, s, e);
Can you add a patch before to fix the indentation within this function?
}
+ for ( j = 0; j < mem_resv->nr_banks; j++, i++ )
+ {
+ printk(" RESVD[%u]: %"PRIpaddr" - %"PRIpaddr"\n", i,
+ mem_resv->bank[j].start,
+ mem_resv->bank[j].start + mem_resv->bank[j].size - 1);
Even if the most of the function is not correctly indented, new code should at
least be.
Assuming the two are taken into account:
Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com>
+ }
printk("\n");
for ( i = 0 ; i < cmds->nr_mods; i++ )
printk("CMDLINE[%"PRIpaddr"]:%s %s\n", cmds->cmdline[i].start,
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel