Change in ...coreboot[master]: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGHN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability
Felix Held has uploaded this change for review. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGHN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
arch/x86/tables: use ALIGHN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability
Change-Id: Idfb814abee87d52d0f5970ec0cd291f738631320 Signed-off-by: Felix Held felix-coreboot@felixheld.de --- M src/arch/x86/tables.c 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/coreboot refs/changes/29/33629/1
diff --git a/src/arch/x86/tables.c b/src/arch/x86/tables.c index f17fb85..3cc385b 100644 --- a/src/arch/x86/tables.c +++ b/src/arch/x86/tables.c @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
/* This table must be between 0x0f0000 and 0x100000 */ rom_table_end = write_pirq_routing_table(rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 1024); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 1024);
/* And add a high table version for those payloads that * want to live in the F segment @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
/* The smp table must be in 0-1K, 639K-640K, or 960K-1M */ rom_table_end = write_smp_table(rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 1024); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 1024);
high_table_pointer = (unsigned long)cbmem_add(CBMEM_ID_MPTABLE, MAX_MP_TABLE_SIZE); @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ unsigned long acpi_start = high_table_pointer; unsigned long new_high_table_pointer;
- rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 16); new_high_table_pointer = write_acpi_tables(high_table_pointer); if (new_high_table_pointer > (high_table_pointer + MAX_ACPI_SIZE)) @@ -146,10 +146,10 @@ printk(BIOS_ERR, "ERROR: Didn't find RSDP in high table.\n"); } - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end + sizeof(acpi_rsdp_t), 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end + sizeof(acpi_rsdp_t), 16); } else { rom_table_end = write_acpi_tables(rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 1024); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 1024); }
return rom_table_end; @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@
new_high_table_pointer = smbios_write_tables(high_table_pointer); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 16); memcpy((void *)rom_table_end, (void *)high_table_pointer, sizeof(struct smbios_entry)); rom_table_end += sizeof(struct smbios_entry); @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ new_rom_table_end = smbios_write_tables(rom_table_end); printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "SMBIOS size %ld bytes\n", new_rom_table_end - rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(new_rom_table_end, 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(new_rom_table_end, 16); }
return rom_table_end;
Felix Held has uploaded a new patch set (#2). ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 )
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability
Change-Id: Idfb814abee87d52d0f5970ec0cd291f738631320 Signed-off-by: Felix Held felix-coreboot@felixheld.de --- M src/arch/x86/tables.c 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/coreboot refs/changes/29/33629/2
Kyösti Mälkki has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 )
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
Patch Set 2: Code-Review+2
Some inconsistency in Jenkins report: "Verified +1, Build Failed". Probably due to editing the commit message.
Paul Menzel has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 )
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
Patch Set 2: Code-Review+1
HAOUAS Elyes has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 )
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
Patch Set 2: Code-Review+1
(1 comment)
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/33629/2/src/arch/x86/tables.c File src/arch/x86/tables.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/33629/2/src/arch/x86/tables.c@39 PS2, Line 39: ALIGN_UP missing include <commonlib/helpers.h> ?
HAOUAS Elyes has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 )
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
Patch Set 2: Code-Review+2
Felix Held has submitted this change and it was merged. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 )
Change subject: arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability ......................................................................
arch/x86/tables: use ALIGN_UP instead of ALIGN for better readability
Change-Id: Idfb814abee87d52d0f5970ec0cd291f738631320 Signed-off-by: Felix Held felix-coreboot@felixheld.de Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33629 Reviewed-by: Kyösti Mälkki kyosti.malkki@gmail.com Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net Reviewed-by: HAOUAS Elyes ehaouas@noos.fr Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) no-reply@coreboot.org --- M src/arch/x86/tables.c 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Approvals: build bot (Jenkins): Verified Kyösti Mälkki: Looks good to me, approved Paul Menzel: Looks good to me, but someone else must approve HAOUAS Elyes: Looks good to me, approved
diff --git a/src/arch/x86/tables.c b/src/arch/x86/tables.c index f17fb85..3cc385b 100644 --- a/src/arch/x86/tables.c +++ b/src/arch/x86/tables.c @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
/* This table must be between 0x0f0000 and 0x100000 */ rom_table_end = write_pirq_routing_table(rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 1024); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 1024);
/* And add a high table version for those payloads that * want to live in the F segment @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@
/* The smp table must be in 0-1K, 639K-640K, or 960K-1M */ rom_table_end = write_smp_table(rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 1024); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 1024);
high_table_pointer = (unsigned long)cbmem_add(CBMEM_ID_MPTABLE, MAX_MP_TABLE_SIZE); @@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ unsigned long acpi_start = high_table_pointer; unsigned long new_high_table_pointer;
- rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 16); new_high_table_pointer = write_acpi_tables(high_table_pointer); if (new_high_table_pointer > (high_table_pointer + MAX_ACPI_SIZE)) @@ -146,10 +146,10 @@ printk(BIOS_ERR, "ERROR: Didn't find RSDP in high table.\n"); } - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end + sizeof(acpi_rsdp_t), 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end + sizeof(acpi_rsdp_t), 16); } else { rom_table_end = write_acpi_tables(rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 1024); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 1024); }
return rom_table_end; @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@
new_high_table_pointer = smbios_write_tables(high_table_pointer); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(rom_table_end, 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(rom_table_end, 16); memcpy((void *)rom_table_end, (void *)high_table_pointer, sizeof(struct smbios_entry)); rom_table_end += sizeof(struct smbios_entry); @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ new_rom_table_end = smbios_write_tables(rom_table_end); printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "SMBIOS size %ld bytes\n", new_rom_table_end - rom_table_end); - rom_table_end = ALIGN(new_rom_table_end, 16); + rom_table_end = ALIGN_UP(new_rom_table_end, 16); }
return rom_table_end;
-
Felix Held (Code Review) -
HAOUAS Elyes (Code Review)
-
Kyösti Mälkki (Code Review)
-
Paul Menzel (Code Review)