Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] arm64: Get rid of __early_init_dt_declare_initrd()

[Florian Fainelli]

On 11/6/18 6:06 AM, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 02:54:25PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Changes in v4:
>>
>> - dropped initrd_below_start_ok assignment in ARM64, not necessary at
>>   all (Ard)
>> - replace #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD with if
>>   (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD) for consistency with other parts
>>   of arm64_memblock_init() (Rob)
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>>
>> - use C conditionals in drivers/of/fdt.c
>> - added check on phys_initrd_size in arch/arm64/mm/init.c to determine
>>   whether initrd_start must be populated
>> - fixed a build warning with ARC that was just missing an (unsigned
>>   long) cast
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>>
>> - get rid of ARCH_HAS_PHYS_INITRD and instead define
>>   phys_initrd_start/phys_initrd_size in init/do_mounts_initrd.c
>>
>> - make __early_init_dt_declare_initrd() account for ARM64 specific
>>   behavior with __va() when having CONFIG_DEBUG_VM enabled
>>
>> - consolidate early_initrd() command line parsing into
>>   init/do_mounts_initrd.c
>>
>> Because phys_initrd_start/phys_initrd_size are now compiled in
>> ini/do_mounts_initrd.c which is only built with CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD=y,
>> we need to be a bit careful about the uses throughout architecture
>> specific code.
>>
>> Previous discussions/submissions list here:
>>
>> v3:
>> https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg683566.html
>> v2:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/25/4
>>
>> Florian Fainelli (6):
>>   nds32: Remove phys_initrd_start and phys_initrd_size
>>   arch: Make phys_initrd_start and phys_initrd_size global variables
>>   of/fdt: Populate phys_initrd_start/phys_initrd_size from FDT
>>   arm64: Utilize phys_initrd_start/phys_initrd_size
>>   of/fdt: Remove custom __early_init_dt_declare_initrd() implementation
>>   arch: Move initrd= parsing into do_mounts_initrd.c
> 
> For the series:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks Mike, Rob, do you want to merge that series through the OF tree?
-- 
Florian