From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org",
	Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK))
	by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 289C3B7085
	for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>;
	Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:49:07 +1000 (EST)
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 821C0DDD01
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:49:06 +1000 (EST)
Subject: Re: rtas instantiation when commandline contains mem
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Benjamin Krill <ben@codiert.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090717063620.GC22901@codiert.org>
References: <20090716131246.GB22901@codiert.org>
	<1247783770.27937.61.camel@pasglop>
	<20090717063620.GC22901@codiert.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:48:49 +1000
Message-Id: <1247813329.6101.7.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 08:36 +0200, Benjamin Krill wrote:
> >> the rtas instantiation (prom_init.c) doesn't work correctly if the
> >> kernel parameter "mem=" is used. The current code doesn't evaluate
> >> the kernel parameter which causes the issue that alloc_down
> >> allocates somewhere in the "real" memory space. So it can
> >> happen that the allocation space is above "mem=".
> >> 
> >> Commit 2babf5c2ec2f2d5de3e38d20f7df7fd815fd10c9 removes the
> >> evaluation of "mem=".
> >
> >Ah yes, we don't constraint prom_init.c to mem=, only the kernel
> 
> Is that with intent? Or should I provide a patch to include it again?

Well I suppose it makes sense to include it again, not sure about that,
there's potentially a similar issue with TCE tables.

I understand what you are trying to do (though I told you I don't think
it's the right approach ;-) but heh... send a patch we'll see what it
looks like.

Cheers,
Ben.