| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
There is no need to have two separate API's for freeing up memory. Use
a single API lmb_free() to achieve this.
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
There currently are two API's for requesting memory from the LMB
module, lmb_alloc() and lmb_alloc_base(). The function which does the
actual allocation is the same. Use the earlier introduced API
lmb_alloc_mem() for both types of allocation requests.
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
There currently are multiple allocation API's in the LMB module. There
are a couple of API's for allocating memory(lmb_alloc() and
lmb_alloc_base()), and then there are two for requesting a reservation
for a particular memory region (lmb_reserve() and
lmb_alloc_addr()). Introduce a single API lmb_alloc_mem() which will
cater to all types of allocation requests and replace lmb_reserve()
and lmb_alloc_addr() with the new API.
Moreover, the lmb_reserve() API is pretty similar to the
lmb_alloc_addr() API, with the one difference being that the
lmb_reserve() API allows for reserving any address passed to it --
the address need not be part of the LMB memory map. The
lmb_alloc_addr() does check that the address being requested is
actually part of the LMB memory map.
There is no need to support reserving memory regions which are outside
the LMB memory map. Remove the lmb_reserve() API functionality and use
the functionality provided by lmb_alloc_addr() instead. The
lmb_alloc_addr() will check if the requested address is part of the
LMB memory map and return an error if not.
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
Commit 56f186a68b3 ("lmb: check if a region can be reserved by
lmb_reserve()") fixed the lmb_reserve() and lmb_alloc_addr() API's for
some corner case scenarios, and also added corresonding test cases for
these corner cases. These tests were checking, among other things, the
lmb_alloc_addr() API. The above commit was applied to the next branch.
Subsequently, there was commit 67be24906fe
("lmb: change the return code on lmb_alloc_addr()") which was first
applied on the master branch, and subsequently got merged to next as
part of the rebase. The second commit changes the return value of the
lmb_alloc_addr() API, which now results in some of the tests added as
part of the first commit to fail. Fix those test cases.
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
|
|
Prepare v2025.04-rc5
|
|
Ben reports a failure to boot the kernel on hardware that starts its
physical memory from 0x0.
The reason is that lmb_alloc_addr(), which is supposed to reserve a
specific address, takes the address as the first argument, but then also
returns the address for success or failure and treats 0 as a failure.
Since we already know the address change the prototype to return an int.
Reported-by: Ben Schneider <ben@bens.haus>
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Ben Schneider <ben@bens.haus>
Reviewed-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
|
|
The logic used in lmb_alloc() takes into consideration the existing
reserved regions, and ensures that the allocated region does not
overlap with any existing allocated regions. The lmb_reserve()
function is not doing any such checks -- the requested region might
overlap with an existing region. This also shows up with
lmb_alloc_addr() as this function ends up calling lmb_reserve().
Add a function which checks if the region requested is overlapping
with an existing reserved region, and allow for the reservation to
happen only if both the regions have LMB_NONE flag, which allows
re-requesting of the region. In any other scenario of an overlap, have
lmb_reserve() return -EEXIST, implying that the requested region is
already reserved.
Add corresponding test cases which check for overlapping reservation
requests made through lmb_reserve() and lmb_alloc_addr(). And while
here, fix some of the comments in the test function being touched.
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com>
|
|
lmb_alloc_base() is just calling lmb_alloc_base_flags() with LMB_NONE.
There's not much we gain from this abstraction, so let's remove the
former add the flags argument to lmb_alloc_base() and make the code
a bit easier to follow.
Reviewed-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
lmb_alloc_addr() is just calling lmb_alloc_addr_flags() with LMB_NONE
There's not much we gain from this abstraction, so let's remove the
latter, add a flags argument to lmb_alloc_addr() and make the code a
bit easier to follow.
Reviewed-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
free_mem is a misnomer. We never update it with the free memory for
LMB. Instead, it describes all available memory and is checked against
used_mem to decide whether an area is free or not.
So let's rename this field to better match its usage.
Reviewed-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
lmb_reserve() is just calling lmb_reserve_flags() with LMB_NONE.
There's not much we gain from this abstraction.
So let's remove the latter, add the flags argument to lmb_reserve()
and make the code a bit easier to follow.
Reviewed-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
Reviewed-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
An attempt to add the already added LMB region using
lmb_add_region_flags() ends up in lmb_addrs_overlap() check, which
eventually leads to either returning 0 if 'flags' is LMB_NONE, or -1
otherwise. It makes it impossible for the user of this function to catch
the case when the region is already added and differentiate it from
regular errors. That in turn may lead to incorrect error handling in the
caller code, like reporting misleading errors or interrupting the normal
code path where it could be treated as the normal case. An example is
boot_fdt_reserve_region() function, which might be called twice (e.g.
during board startup in initr_lmb(), and then during 'booti' command
booting the OS), thus trying to reserve exactly the same memory regions
described in the device tree twice, which produces an error message on
second call.
Return -EEXIST error code in case when the added region exists and it's
not LMB_NONE; for LMB_NONE return 0, to conform to unit tests
(specifically test_alloc_addr() in test/lib/lmb.c) and the preferred
behavior described in commit 1d9aa4a283da ("lmb: Fix the allocation of
overlapping memory areas with !LMB_NONE"). The change of
lmb_add_region_flags() return values is described in the table below:
Return case Pre-1d9 1d9 New
-----------------------------------------------------------
Added successfully 0 0 0
Failed to add -1 -1 -1
Already added, flags == LMB_NONE 0 0 0
Already added, flags != LMB_NONE 0 -1 -EEXIST
Rework all affected functions and their documentation. Also fix the
corresponding unit test which checks reserving the same region with the
same flags to account for the changed return value.
No functional change is intended (by this patch itself).
Fixes: 1d9aa4a283da ("lmb: Fix the allocation of overlapping memory areas with !LMB_NONE")
Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
|
|
At the moment the LMB allocator will return 'success' immediately on two
consecutive allocations if the second one is smaller and the flags match
without resizing the reserved area.
This is problematic for two reasons, first of all the new updated
allocation won't update the size and we end up holding more memory than
needed, but most importantly it breaks the EFI SCT tests since EFI
now allocates via LMB.
More specifically when EFI requests a specific address twice with the
EFI_ALLOCATE_ADDRESS flag set, the first allocation will succeed and
update the EFI memory map. Due to the LMB behavior the second allocation
will also succeed but the address ranges are already in the EFI memory
map due the first allocation. EFI will then fail to update the memory map,
returning EFI_OUT_OF_RESOURCES instead of EFI_NOT_FOUND which break EFI
conformance.
So let's remove the fast check with is problematic anyway and leave LMB
resize and calculate address properly. LMB will now
- try to resize the reservations for LMB_NONE
- return -1 if the memory is not LMB_NONE and already reserved
The LMB code needs some cleanup in that part, but since we are close to
2025.01 do the easy fix and plan to refactor it later.
Also update the dm tests with the new behavior.
Fixes: commit 22f2c9ed9f53 ("efi: memory: use the lmb API's for allocating and freeing memory")
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
The function description says this should return 0 or -1 on failures.
When regions coalesce though this returns the number of coalescedregions
which is confusing and requires special handling of the return code.
On top of that no one is using the number of coalesced regions.
So let's just return 0 on success and adjust our selftests accordingly
Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@linaro.org>
|
|
Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org> says:
This is a follow-up from an earlier RFC series [1] for making the LMB
and EFI memory allocations work together. This is a non-rfc version
with only the LMB part of the patches, for making the LMB memory map
global and persistent.
This is part one of a set of patches which aim to have the LMB and EFI
memory allocations work together. This requires making the LMB memory
map global and persistent, instead of having local, caller specific
maps. This is being done keeping in mind the usage of LMB memory by
platforms where the same memory region can be used to load multiple
different images. What is not allowed is to overwrite memory that has
been allocated by the other module, currently the EFI memory
module. This is being achieved by introducing a new flag,
LMB_NOOVERWRITE, which represents memory which cannot be re-requested
once allocated.
The data structures (alloced lists) required for maintaining the LMB
map are initialised during board init. The LMB module is enabled by
default for the main U-Boot image, while it needs to be enabled for
SPL. This version also uses a stack implementation, as suggested by
Simon Glass to temporarily store the lmb structure instance which is
used during normal operation when running lmb tests. This does away
with the need to run the lmb tests separately.
The tests have been tweaked where needed because of these changes.
The second part of the patches, to be sent subsequently, would work on
having the EFI allocations work with the LMB API's.
[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/20240704073544.670249-1-sughosh.ganu@linaro.org/T/#t
Notes:
1) These patches are on next, as the alist patches have been
applied to that branch.
2) I have tested the boot on the ST DK2 board, but it would be good to
get a T-b/R-b from the ST maintainers.
3) It will be good to test these changes on a PowerPC platform
(ideally an 85xx, as I do not have one).
|
|
The current LMB API's for allocating and reserving memory use a
per-caller based memory view. Memory allocated by a caller can then be
overwritten by another caller. Make these allocations and reservations
persistent using the alloced list data structure.
Two alloced lists are declared -- one for the available(free) memory,
and one for the used memory. Once full, the list can then be extended
at runtime.
[sjg: Use a stack to store pointer of lmb struct when running lmb tests]
Signed-off-by: Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
[sjg: Optimise the logic to add a region in lmb_add_region_flags()]
|
|
Most tests don't have this. It helps to keep the test declaration
clearly associated with the function it relates to, rather than the next
one in the file. Remove the extra blank line and mention this in the
docs.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
As part of bringing the master branch back in to next, we need to allow
for all of these changes to exist here.
Reported-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
|
|
When bringing in the series 'arm: dts: am62-beagleplay: Fix Beagleplay
Ethernet"' I failed to notice that b4 noticed it was based on next and
so took that as the base commit and merged that part of next to master.
This reverts commit c8ffd1356d42223cbb8c86280a083cc3c93e6426, reversing
changes made to 2ee6f3a5f7550de3599faef9704e166e5dcace35.
Reported-by: Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
|
|
Remove <common.h> from all "test/" files and when needed add
missing include files directly.
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
|
|
These tests are marked as driver model tests, but have nothing to do
with driver model. As a result, they are run as part of 'ut dm' which
only exists for sandbox.
Move them to the 'lib' suite and drop the requirement for initing
devices, since they don't use devices.
Also put the lib_test_lmb_max_regions() macro inside the same #ifdef
as its function, to avoid a build error if the condition is false.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
Add test case for an address range which is coalescing with one of
range and overlapping with next range
Cc: Simon Glass <sjg@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Udit Kumar <u-kumar1@ti.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
First, this test depends on CONFIG_LMB_USE_MAX_REGIONS, so add that as a
test before building. Second, instead of using a hard-coded value of 8,
which is the default of CONFIG_LMB_USE_MAX_REGIONS previously, use that
directly and update the comments. The only trick here is that one part
of the test itself also was written with the value of 8 itself in mind.
Rework the size of the lmb region we allocate to scale with the value of
CONFIG_LMB_USE_MAX_REGIONS.
Cc: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
Defining static functions in includes should be avoided.
Function lmb_is_nomap() is only used in the unit test.
So move it to the unit test.
Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
Acked-by: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
|
|
Add a test to check the management of reserved region with flags.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
Add test for max number of memory regions and in reserved regions.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com>
|
|
The test flags used by driver model are currently not available to other
tests. Rather than creating two sets of flags, make these flags generic
by changing the DM_ prefix to UT_ and moving them to the test.h header.
This will allow adding other test flags without confusion.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
These header file should not be included in other header files. Remove
them and add to each individual file. Add test/test.h to test/ui.h since
that is a reasonable place.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
Move this header out of the common header.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
At present dm/device.h includes the linux-compatible features. This
requires including linux/compat.h which in turn includes a lot of headers.
One of these is malloc.h which we thus end up including in every file in
U-Boot. Apart from the inefficiency of this, it is problematic for sandbox
which needs to use the system malloc() in some files.
Move the compatibility features into a separate header file.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
This adds one test case that checks that allocation with multiple
DRAM banks works correctly.
Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
|
As a follow-up, change the name of the newly introduced function
'lmb_get_unreserved_size' to 'lmb_get_free_size', which is more
appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@gmail.com>
[trini: Fix test/lib/lmb.c]
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
|
|
This adds two new functions, lmb_alloc_addr and
lmb_get_unreserved_size.
lmb_alloc_addr behaves like lmb_alloc, but it tries to allocate a
pre-specified address range. Unlike lmb_reserve, this address range
must be inside one of the memory ranges that has been set up with
lmb_add.
lmb_get_unreserved_size returns the number of bytes that can be
used up to the next reserved region or the end of valid ram. This
can be 0 if the address passed is reserved.
Added test for these new functions.
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@gmail.com>
|
|
lmb_add_region handles overlapping regions wrong: instead of merging
or rejecting to add a new reserved region that overlaps an existing
one, it just adds the new region.
Since internally the same function is used for lmb_alloc, change
lmb_add_region to reject overlapping regions.
Also, to keep reserved memory correct after 'free', reserved entries
created by allocating memory must not set their size to a multiple
of alignment but to the original size. This ensures the reserved
region is completely removed when the caller calls 'lmb_free', as
this one takes the same size as passed to 'lmb_alloc' etc.
Add test to assert this.
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@gmail.com>
|
|
The lmb code fails if base + size of RAM overflows to zero.
Fix this by calculating end as 'base + size - 1' instead of 'base + size'
where appropriate.
Added tests to assert this is fixed.
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@gmail.com>
|
|
Add basic tests for the lmb memory allocation code used to reserve and
allocate memory during boot.
Signed-off-by: Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
|
