From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] Fix non-LPAE boot regression.
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 15:39:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110813143903.GQ4775@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHkRjk4p1kqwKGiW_XRFU0aap98QkvRGRs0hwsBR4CcfM5RKqA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 03:14:30PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Thanks for this. The original code was indeed broken but I think the
> fix should be to use SECTION_SIZE instead of SHIFT. I'll have a look
> on Monday.
No, the original code is not broken. Look at what it's doing:
mov r5, r5, lsr #20
mov r6, r6, lsr #20
1: orr r3, r7, r5, lsl #20 @ flags + kernel base
str r3, [r4, r5, lsl #2] @ identity mapping
teq r5, r6
addne r5, r5, #1 @ next section
bne 1b
The addition of one is to step us to the next page table entry. It's
not SECTION_SHIFT >> 20 or anything like that.
Let's rewrite it in C:
pmd_idx = r5 >> 20;
pmd_end = r6 >> 20;
do {
pmd[pmd_idx] = flags | (pmd_idx << 20);
if (pmd_idx == pmd_end)
break;
pmd_idx++;
} while (1);
which is quite correct for non-LPAE. Those shifts of 20 could well have
been SECTION_SHIFT instead to make it more clear what's going on there.
Now, with LPAE, where pmds are now 64-bit, the fact that SECTION_SHIFT
becomes 21 is merely coincidental. That doesn't mean that the add
instruction should be SECTION_SIZE >> 20, as you're using apples to
describe oranges there.
With SECTION_SIZE >> 20, your modified code looks like this for LPAE:
+ mov r5, r5, lsr #21
+ mov r6, r6, lsr #21
+1: orr r3, r7, r5, lsl #21 @ flags + kernel base
+ str r3, [r4, r5, lsl #3] @ identity mapping
+ cmp r5, r6
+ addlo r5, r5, #2 @ next section
+ blo 1b
So: for LPAE:
r5 increments by 2, so r3 increments by 2 << 21.
[r4, r5, lsl #3] increments by 2<<3 = 16.
for non-LPAE (from above):
r5 increments by 1, so r3 increments by 1 << 20.
[r4, r5, lsl #2] increments by 1<<2 = 4.
so that's not correct either. Rather than incrementing by one section
on LPAE, we increment by two. Not only that, but the pointer also
increments by twice as much.
So, this should become something like this instead:
mov r5, r5, lsr #SECTION_SHIFT
mov r6, r6, lsr #SECTION_SHIFT
1: orr r3, r7, r5, lsl #SECTION_SHIFT @ flags + kernel base
str r3, [r4, r5, lsl #PMD_ORDER] @ identity mapping
teq r5, r6
addne r5, r5, #1 @ next section
bne 1b
which is what Vasily's patch does.
I think this patch is trying to do too much in one go. It needs splitting
up into two, just like is done with the C PGDIR_SHIFT vs PMD_SHIFT stuff
(and arguably the first part should be combined with the patch fixing the
PGDIR_SHIFT stuff.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-13 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-10 15:03 [PATCH v7 00/16] ARM: Add support for the Large Physical Address Extensions Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 01/16] ARM: LPAE: add ISBs around MMU enabling code Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 02/16] ARM: LPAE: Cast the dma_addr_t argument to unsigned long in dma_to_virt Catalin Marinas
2011-08-13 14:33 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-08-23 11:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 03/16] ARM: LPAE: Use PMD_(SHIFT|SIZE|MASK) instead of PGDIR_* Catalin Marinas
2011-08-13 14:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-08-15 16:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-23 11:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-08-23 13:09 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 04/16] ARM: LPAE: Factor out 2-level page table definitions into separate files Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 05/16] ARM: LPAE: Add (pte|pmd)val_t type definitions as u32 Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 06/16] ARM: LPAE: Use a mask for physical addresses in page table entries Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 07/16] ARM: LPAE: Introduce the 3-level page table format definitions Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 08/16] ARM: LPAE: Page table maintenance for the 3-level format Catalin Marinas
2011-10-23 11:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-10-23 12:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 09/16] ARM: LPAE: MMU setup for the 3-level page table format Catalin Marinas
2011-08-13 11:49 ` Vasily Khoruzhick
2011-08-13 12:56 ` Vasily Khoruzhick
2011-08-13 12:58 ` [PATCH] Fix non-LPAE boot regression Vasily Khoruzhick
2011-08-13 14:14 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-13 14:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2011-08-13 14:45 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-15 11:41 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-15 12:09 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-15 12:31 ` Vasily Khoruzhick
2011-08-24 8:16 ` Vasily Khoruzhick
2011-08-15 16:51 ` [PATCH v7 09/16] ARM: LPAE: MMU setup for the 3-level page table format Catalin Marinas
2011-08-19 10:25 ` Ian Campbell
2011-08-19 11:10 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-19 11:47 ` Ian Campbell
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 10/16] ARM: LPAE: Invalidate the TLB before freeing the PMD Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 11/16] ARM: LPAE: Add fault handling support Catalin Marinas
2011-10-23 11:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-11-02 17:02 ` Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 12/16] ARM: LPAE: Add context switching support Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 13/16] ARM: LPAE: Add identity mapping support for the 3-level page table format Catalin Marinas
2011-10-23 11:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 14/16] ARM: LPAE: mark memory banks with start > ULONG_MAX as highmem Catalin Marinas
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 15/16] ARM: LPAE: add support for ATAG_MEM64 Catalin Marinas
2011-10-23 11:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-08-10 15:03 ` [PATCH v7 16/16] ARM: LPAE: Add the Kconfig entries Catalin Marinas
2011-10-23 12:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-11-02 17:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-11-02 18:07 ` Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110813143903.GQ4775@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).