From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mans@mansr.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:31:06 +0000 Subject: [Linaro-acpi] Touching the initrd before paging_init In-Reply-To: <567031F2.8060102@redhat.com> (Jon Masters's message of "Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:29:54 -0500") References: <566D3090.9090509@redhat.com> <20151213165942.GN25034@bivouac.eciton.net> <23071B8C-D1F9-47A6-9DB4-B26842150B76@redhat.com> <566DEB04.2030806@redhat.com> <566DEDFC.909@redhat.com> <566F9C3D.4090306@redhat.com> <567031F2.8060102@redhat.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Jon Masters writes: > On 12/15/2015 06:43 AM, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote: >> Jon Masters writes: > >>> But the reading of that cpio content into the new table locations is >>> done using the kernel memcpy routine to early_ioremap'd memory (Device >>> memory), which is architecturally sensitive to missaligned accesses. >> >> As others have pointed out, your error is twofold: first using >> early_ioremap() when early_memremap() would do, then using regular >> memcpy() and not memcpy_fromio() on that. Seems like your precious ACPI >> code is to blame here. > > So I get that this could be changed. But I still want to understand > whether memcpy is behaving correctly. It is. I already explained why it's the correct way. -- M?ns Rullg?rd