Re: Relocating interrupt vectors in ppc440?

[Matt Porter <mporter@kernel.crashing.org>]

On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 12:18:45PM -0800, Shawn Jin wrote:
> First thank you for your valuable response.
> 
> > > Assumed that the interrupt vectors locate at the low address space
> > > physically and given that there is 2GB SDRAM shared by two ppc440
> > > cores, can one of linux kernels run at the top of 1GB space? This
> > > means the interrupt vectors for this copy need to move to upper 1GB.
> > > Each core runs a copy of linux kernel independently.
> > 
> > Yes, you'd have to do something like the APUS code does by settings
> > PPC_MEMSTART appropriately for the second processor. Also, of course
> 
> I guess the value set to PPC_MEMSTART should be the offset to the
> physical starting address of 2GB SDRAM not the absolute physical
> address, right?

It would be 0x00000000 for the first processor and 0x40000000 for the
second processor. Note that head_44x.S is a major place where a lot
of "system memory is at zero" assumptions take place that need to
be addressed for the second processor.
 
> > limiting the memory on the first processor to 1GB. There's probably
> 
> Limiting the memory on the first processor to 1GB can be done by
> setting the mem size to 1GB in boot arguments (mem=1024MB)?

Correct, but for a SoC port where this is a static configuration, you
can simply make your "find_end_of_memory()" routine return 1GB.

> > One idea is that if you really don't have to do it, then don't. :)
> 
> The SoC is designed in this way that two cores share the DDR but it's
> not SMP. Two kernels have to run independently. Relocating interrupt
> vectors to upper 1GB memory means that another copy of kernel can run
> at upper memory, right. So I'm afraid I have to do that. :(

That's a shame. This sounds identical to a 440-based standard product
that IBM had planned (and cancelled) when they still owned the 4xx
standard product line.
 
-Matt