[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm64: Keep macro PGTABLE_SIZE for non-full-va map
Commit 7985cdf removed non-full-va map code, replaced PGTABLE_SIZE with get_page_table_size() function for all. It is incorrect for platforms with non-full-va mapping, at this moment Layerscape SoCs.
Signed-off-by: York Sun york.sun@nxp.com CC: Alexander Graf agraf@suse.de CC: Alison Wang alison.wang@nxp.com CC: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com --- arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h index ac1173d..fab6f0c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
u64 get_page_table_size(void); +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FULL_VA #define PGTABLE_SIZE get_page_table_size() +#else +#define PGTABLE_SIZE 0x10000 +#endif
/* 2MB granularity */ #define MMU_SECTION_SHIFT 21
On Mar 21, 2016, at 7:59 PM, York Sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
Commit 7985cdf removed non-full-va map code, replaced PGTABLE_SIZE with get_page_table_size() function for all. It is incorrect for platforms with non-full-va mapping, at this moment Layerscape SoCs.
Signed-off-by: York Sun york.sun@nxp.com CC: Alexander Graf agraf@suse.de CC: Alison Wang alison.wang@nxp.com CC: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h index ac1173d..fab6f0c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
u64 get_page_table_size(void); +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FULL_VA
This macro doesn't exist anymore. We need to do something different. Let me cook up a patch.
Alex
#define PGTABLE_SIZE get_page_table_size() +#else +#define PGTABLE_SIZE 0x10000 +#endif
/* 2MB granularity */
#define MMU_SECTION_SHIFT 21
1.7.9.5
On 03/21/2016 12:12 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Mar 21, 2016, at 7:59 PM, York Sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
Commit 7985cdf removed non-full-va map code, replaced PGTABLE_SIZE with get_page_table_size() function for all. It is incorrect for platforms with non-full-va mapping, at this moment Layerscape SoCs.
Signed-off-by: York Sun york.sun@nxp.com CC: Alexander Graf agraf@suse.de CC: Alison Wang alison.wang@nxp.com CC: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h index ac1173d..fab6f0c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
u64 get_page_table_size(void); +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FULL_VA
This macro doesn't exist anymore. We need to do something different. Let me cook up a patch.
Thanks.
After this, I want to discuss the possibility to use the new infrastructure for our SoCs. The key is we have limited on-chip RAM before DDR is initialized. We cannot use full va mapping for this reason for early MMU tables. We should have not problem to use it for the final MMU tables. We are exploring initializing DDR before U-Boot, but we are not anywhere close yet.
York
On Mar 21, 2016, at 8:23 PM, york sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
On 03/21/2016 12:12 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Mar 21, 2016, at 7:59 PM, York Sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
Commit 7985cdf removed non-full-va map code, replaced PGTABLE_SIZE with get_page_table_size() function for all. It is incorrect for platforms with non-full-va mapping, at this moment Layerscape SoCs.
Signed-off-by: York Sun york.sun@nxp.com CC: Alexander Graf agraf@suse.de CC: Alison Wang alison.wang@nxp.com CC: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h index ac1173d..fab6f0c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
u64 get_page_table_size(void); +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FULL_VA
This macro doesn't exist anymore. We need to do something different. Let me cook up a patch.
Thanks.
After this, I want to discuss the possibility to use the new infrastructure for our SoCs. The key is we have limited on-chip RAM before DDR is initialized. We cannot use full va mapping for this reason for early MMU tables. We should have
I'm not sure I understand this part. How is full va different from your current approach? The only really major difference is that you can do non-1:1 maps.
If all maps are aligned, you shouldn't waste too much memory compared to your current approach, no?
Alex
not problem to use it for the final MMU tables. We are exploring initializing DDR before U-Boot, but we are not anywhere close yet.
York
On 03/21/2016 12:29 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Mar 21, 2016, at 8:23 PM, york sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
On 03/21/2016 12:12 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Mar 21, 2016, at 7:59 PM, York Sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
Commit 7985cdf removed non-full-va map code, replaced PGTABLE_SIZE with get_page_table_size() function for all. It is incorrect for platforms with non-full-va mapping, at this moment Layerscape SoCs.
Signed-off-by: York Sun york.sun@nxp.com CC: Alexander Graf agraf@suse.de CC: Alison Wang alison.wang@nxp.com CC: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h index ac1173d..fab6f0c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
u64 get_page_table_size(void); +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FULL_VA
This macro doesn't exist anymore. We need to do something different. Let me cook up a patch.
Thanks.
After this, I want to discuss the possibility to use the new infrastructure for our SoCs. The key is we have limited on-chip RAM before DDR is initialized. We cannot use full va mapping for this reason for early MMU tables. We should have
I'm not sure I understand this part. How is full va different from your current approach? The only really major difference is that you can do non-1:1 maps.
If all maps are aligned, you shouldn't waste too much memory compared to your current approach, no?
The new full va map doesn't map all space, only the selected mapping in the table, correct? If yes, we should be able to fix the tables in the on-chip RAM.
I think my case is different because I use two tables. The final table is equivalent to those everyone else is using. The early table is different with non 1:1 mapping. This feature shouldn't be too hard to add.
Now it comes the third part. The early table is so early, we don't have gd setup yet, or printf. We need to change the table handling to accept an argument, instead of using gd for table pointer.
York
On 21.03.16 20:39, york sun wrote:
On 03/21/2016 12:29 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Mar 21, 2016, at 8:23 PM, york sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
On 03/21/2016 12:12 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Mar 21, 2016, at 7:59 PM, York Sun york.sun@nxp.com wrote:
Commit 7985cdf removed non-full-va map code, replaced PGTABLE_SIZE with get_page_table_size() function for all. It is incorrect for platforms with non-full-va mapping, at this moment Layerscape SoCs.
Signed-off-by: York Sun york.sun@nxp.com CC: Alexander Graf agraf@suse.de CC: Alison Wang alison.wang@nxp.com CC: Prabhakar Kushwaha prabhakar.kushwaha@nxp.com
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h index ac1173d..fab6f0c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h @@ -20,7 +20,11 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
u64 get_page_table_size(void); +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FULL_VA
This macro doesn't exist anymore. We need to do something different. Let me cook up a patch.
Thanks.
After this, I want to discuss the possibility to use the new infrastructure for our SoCs. The key is we have limited on-chip RAM before DDR is initialized. We cannot use full va mapping for this reason for early MMU tables. We should have
I'm not sure I understand this part. How is full va different from your current approach? The only really major difference is that you can do non-1:1 maps.
If all maps are aligned, you shouldn't waste too much memory compared to your current approach, no?
The new full va map doesn't map all space, only the selected mapping in the table, correct? If yes, we should be able to fix the tables in the on-chip RAM.
Yes, it maps as much as it needs to fit your largest page in that you describe in the table.
I think my case is different because I use two tables. The final table is equivalent to those everyone else is using. The early table is different with non 1:1 mapping. This feature shouldn't be too hard to add.
I think it would be trivial to add. Just call the existing functions with an explicit table passed as parameter instead of the implicit global variable :).
Now it comes the third part. The early table is so early, we don't have gd setup yet, or printf. We need to change the table handling to accept an argument, instead of using gd for table pointer.
Yes, exactly. That's much cleaner anyway, so I'd welcome that change.
Alex
participants (3)
-
Alexander Graf -
York Sun -
york sun