On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 11:58:46PM +0530, Sughosh Ganu wrote: > On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 at 11:36 PM, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 09:32:29PM +0100, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Sughosh, > > > > > > On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 at 05:02, Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Instead of a randomly selected address, use an LMB allocated one for > > > > reading the file into memory. With the LMB map now being persistent > > > > and global, the address used for reading the file might be already > > > > allocated as non-overwritable, resulting in a failure. Get a valid > > > > address from LMB and then read the file to that address. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > Changes since V1: > > > > * Don't use the API version with flags parameter. > > > > > > > > test/boot/cedit.c | 6 +++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > No, this address needs to work fine without using lmb. Same with any > > > other tests. Tests make use of the sandbox memory space memory > > > addresses and it makes things easier to code and debug. > > > > Can't we just request/free that address from LMB then? > > > Very good point. Because that is precisely what this patch does :)
Ah, I think the wording is unclear then in the commit message. It needs to reflect that we're taking a previously intentional address and now reserving/releasing it with LMB. And perhaps not change from hex to decimal too. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
