lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6] ARM: boot: Obtain start of physical memory from DTB
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 02:49:57PM +0200, Lukasz Stelmach wrote:
> It was <2020-05-19 wto 13:27>, when Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 02:20:25PM +0200, Lukasz Stelmach wrote:
> >> It was <2020-05-19 wto 12:43>, when Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 01:21:09PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:46 AM Russell King - ARM Linux admin
> >>>> <linux@armlinux.org.uk> wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 11:44:17AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:54 AM Lukasz Stelmach <l.stelmach@samsung.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> It was <2020-04-29 śro 10:21>, when Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Currently, the start address of physical memory is obtained by masking
> >>>>>>>> the program counter with a fixed mask of 0xf8000000. This mask value
> >>>>>>>> was chosen as a balance between the requirements of different platforms.
> >>>>>>>> However, this does require that the start address of physical memory is
> >>>>>>>> a multiple of 128 MiB, precluding booting Linux on platforms where this
> >>>>>>>> requirement is not fulfilled.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Fix this limitation by obtaining the start address from the DTB instead,
> >>>>>>>> if available (either explicitly passed, or appended to the kernel).
> >>>>>>>> Fall back to the traditional method when needed.
> [...]
> >>>>>>> Apparently reading physical memory layout from DTB breaks crashdump
> >>>>>>> kernels. A crashdump kernel is loaded into a region of memory, that is
> >>>>>>> reserved in the original (i.e. to be crashed) kernel. The reserved
> >>>>>>> region is large enough for the crashdump kernel to run completely inside
> >>>>>>> it and don't modify anything outside it, just read and dump the remains
> >>>>>>> of the crashed kernel. Using the information from DTB makes the
> >>>>>>> decompressor place the kernel outside of the dedicated region.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The log below shows that a zImage and DTB are loaded at 0x18eb8000 and
> >>>>>>> 0x193f6000 (physical). The kernel is expected to run at 0x18008000, but
> >>>>>>> it is decompressed to 0x00008000 (see r4 reported before jumping from
> >>>>>>> within __enter_kernel). If I were to suggest something, there need to be
> >>>>>>> one more bit of information passed in the DTB telling the decompressor
> >>>>>>> to use the old masking technique to determain kernel address. It would
> >>>>>>> be set in the DTB loaded along with the crashdump kernel.
> [...]
> >>>>>> Describing "to use the old masking technique" sounds a bit hackish to me.
> >>>>>> I guess it cannot just restrict the /memory node to the reserved region,
> >>>>>> as the crashkernel needs to be able to dump the remains of the crashed
> >>>>>> kernel, which lie outside this region.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Correct.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> However, something under /chosen should work.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yet another sticky plaster...
> >>>>
> >>>> IMHO the old masking technique is the hacky solution covered by
> >>>> plasters.
> >>>
> >>> One line of code is not "covered by plasters". There are no plasters.
> >>> It's a solution that works for 99.99% of people, unlike your approach
> >>> that has had a stream of issues over the last four months, and has
> >>> required many reworks of the code to fix each one. That in itself
> >>> speaks volumes about the suitability of the approach.
> >>
> >> As I have been working with kexec code (patches soon) I would like to
> >> defend the DT approach a bit. It allows to avoid zImage relocation when
> >> a decompressed kernel is larger than ~128MiB. In such case zImage isn't
> >> small either and moving it around takes some time.
> >
> > ... which is something that has been supported for a very long time,
> > before the days of DT.
>
> How? If a decompressed kernel requires >128M and a bootloader would like
> to put a zImage high enough to *avoid* copying it once again, then the
> decompressor can't see any memory below the 128M window it starts in and
> can't decompress the kernel there.

Do you have such a large kernel? It would be rather inefficient as
branch instructions could not be used; every function call would have
to be indirect. The maximum is +/- 32MB for a branch.

> If we do not care about copying
> zImage, then, indeed, everything works fine as it is today. You are
> most probably right 99% doesn't require 128M kernel, but the case is
> IMHO obvious enough, that it should be adressed somehow.

If I have a kernel in excess of 4GB... "it should be addressed somehow"!

--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC for 0.8m (est. 1762m) line in suburbia: sync at 13.1Mbps down 424kbps up

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-19 15:14    [W:0.166 / U:0.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site