From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
rppt@linux.ibm.com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
aryabinin@virtuozzo.com, Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@google.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>, Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
ghackmann@android.com,
Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
chandan.vn@samsung.com,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradea>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v5] arm64: Get rid of __early_init_dt_declare_initrd()
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 14:52:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e3033413-555e-72ca-be75-e4b566b62480@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqL2g69Duhkqd=f09BStoAKeakJz8Wgz3is37YU0+fc80A@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/29/18 12:59 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> +Ard who last touched this.
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 2:23 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> ARM64 is the only architecture that re-defines
>> __early_init_dt_declare_initrd() in order for that function to populate
>> initrd_start/initrd_end with physical addresses instead of virtual
>> addresses. Instead of having an override, just get rid of that
>> implementation and perform the virtual to physical conversion of these
>> addresses in arm64_memblock_init() where relevant.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h | 8 -------
>> arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++------------
>> 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
>> index b96442960aea..dc3ca21ba240 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h
>> @@ -168,14 +168,6 @@
>> #define IOREMAP_MAX_ORDER (PMD_SHIFT)
>> #endif
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD
>> -#define __early_init_dt_declare_initrd(__start, __end) \
>> - do { \
>> - initrd_start = (__start); \
>> - initrd_end = (__end); \
>> - } while (0)
>> -#endif
>> -
>> #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>>
>> #include <linux/bitops.h>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
>> index 3cf87341859f..292570b08f85 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
>> @@ -62,6 +62,8 @@
>> s64 memstart_addr __ro_after_init = -1;
>> phys_addr_t arm64_dma_phys_limit __ro_after_init;
>>
>> +static phys_addr_t phys_initrd_start, phys_initrd_end;
>> +
>> #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD
>> static int __init early_initrd(char *p)
>> {
>> @@ -72,8 +74,8 @@ static int __init early_initrd(char *p)
>> if (*endp == ',') {
>> size = memparse(endp + 1, NULL);
>>
>> - initrd_start = start;
>> - initrd_end = start + size;
>> + phys_initrd_start = start;
>> + phys_initrd_end = start + size;
>> }
>> return 0;
>> }
>> @@ -364,6 +366,7 @@ static void __init fdt_enforce_memory_region(void)
>> void __init arm64_memblock_init(void)
>> {
>> const s64 linear_region_size = -(s64)PAGE_OFFSET;
>> + u64 __maybe_unused base, size;
>>
>> /* Handle linux,usable-memory-range property */
>> fdt_enforce_memory_region();
>> @@ -408,14 +411,25 @@ void __init arm64_memblock_init(void)
>> memblock_add(__pa_symbol(_text), (u64)(_end - _text));
>> }
>>
>> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD) && initrd_start) {
>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD) &&
>> + (initrd_start || phys_initrd_start)) {
>
> I've tried to explain already that this is broken. The problem is
> __early_init_dt_declare_initrd using __va() which happens before this
> function is called. __va() uses PHYS_OFFSET which in turn is defined
> as memstart_addr. However, memstart_addr may be changed just above
> this hunk, so the earlier conversion to a VA may not be valid at this
> point. This is explained if you read Ard's commit that added all this
> mess.
Thanks for explaining this again, looks like I had overlooked that
explanation in the "other branch" of the thread last time I read it.
>
> You could fix this by converting back to a PA before adjusting
> memstart_addr, but that's 2 wrongs making a right and fragile. The
> better solution is the other proposal making the DT code set
> phys_initrd_* (whatever the ARM code calls them).
OK, that sounds reasonable, will cook something doing that. Thanks!
>
>> /*
>> * Add back the memory we just removed if it results in the
>> * initrd to become inaccessible via the linear mapping.
>> * Otherwise, this is a no-op
>> */
>> - u64 base = initrd_start & PAGE_MASK;
>> - u64 size = PAGE_ALIGN(initrd_end) - base;
>> + if (phys_initrd_start) {
>> + /* Command line specified the initrd location */
>> + initrd_start = __phys_to_virt(phys_initrd_start);
>> + initrd_end = __phys_to_virt(phys_initrd_end);
>> + } else if (initrd_start) {
>> + /* FDT specified the initrd location */
>> + phys_initrd_start = __pa(initrd_start);
>> + phys_initrd_end = __pa(initrd_end);
>
> Kind of inconsistent to mix __phys_to_virt and __pa flavors.
>
> Rob
>
--
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-29 21:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-29 19:00 [PATCH 0/2 v5] arm64: Get rid of __early_init_dt_declare_initrd() Florian Fainelli
2018-10-29 19:00 ` [PATCH 1/2 " Florian Fainelli
2018-10-29 19:59 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-29 21:52 ` Florian Fainelli [this message]
2018-10-29 21:58 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-10-29 23:24 ` Rob Herring
2018-10-29 19:00 ` [PATCH 2/2 v5] of/fdt: Remove definition check for __early_init_dt_declare_initrd() Florian Fainelli
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=e3033413-555e-72ca-be75-e4b566b62480@gmail.com \
--to=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@google.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=aryabinin@virtuozzo.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chandan.vn@samsung.com \
--cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
--cc=ghackmann@android.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kristina.martsenko@arm.com \
--cc=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradea \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stefan@agner.ch \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \
/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).