From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cort Dougan Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:08:57 -0700 To: Magnus Damm Cc: Tom Rini , linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: bi_record and initrd Message-ID: <20021115100857.H9673@duath.fsmlabs.com> References: <3DD3C747.8B7EE5CD@opensource.se> <20021114174807.GC605@opus.bloom.county> <3DD4E271.16FA374A@opensource.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3DD4E271.16FA374A@opensource.se>; from damm@opensource.se on Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 01:02:57PM +0100 Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: This would be a good opportunity to switch-over to allowing the bootloader stick the initrd where it wants and just pass the physical pointer in via bi_record in all cases. It would certainly simplify these cases. } > Can you give more information about where everything is loaded up at? I } > thought this was a non-issue, but it's been a while since I tested } > initrds. } } Sure. } The first example below does not trigger the bug. } The second one shows the bug. } } First example: } } loaded at: 00180000 0023C1D0 } board data at: 00239124 00239140 } relocated to: 001852FC 00185318 } zimage at: 00185880 00214ADE } initrd at: 00215000 002388D9 } avail ram: 0023D000 04000000 } } gunzip() unzips the zimage to address 0 and sets zimage_size to 0x00148A6C. } I'm not sure about the _ALIGN() macro and how it's used, but in this case } rec gets calculated to 0x00300000. } I thought the idea was to get a address that is aligned to the nearest } 1-megabyte boundary. } (2 megabyte in this case - but that would overwrite the zimage...) } } anyhow, the rec at 3 megabytes is inside of the available ram - good. } } this mail says something about typos or misuse of _ALIGN(). } http://www.geocrawler.com/archives/3/8358/2002/9/0/9715261/ } } If _ALIGN() now is used correctly, then the align definition } maybe chould be changed from } #define _ALIGN(addr,size) (((addr)+size-1)&(~(size-1))) } to } #define _ALIGN(addr,size) (((addr)+(size)-1)&(~((size)-1))) } to make sure that size is treated correctly. Or maybe it's a feature. =) } } Second example: } } loaded at: FE2226F0 FE3098C0 } relocated to: 00180000 002671D0 } board data at: 00264124 00264140 } relocated to: 001852E8 00185304 } zimage at: 00185840 001CCEAB } initrd at: 001CD000 00263A21 } avail ram: 00268000 04000000 } } I have not been able to output the value of zimage_size for this case, but I'm } sure that my initrd gets overwritten with the bi_record at 0x00200000. } We read out the initrd memory area with a BDM debugger and compared with the } original compressed filesystem image. So rec gets set to 2 megabytes. } This results in a initrd with bad crc. If it would help you I could get the value } of zimage_size, but it's on another machine and I don't have the time today. } } Another thing - why is the second argument (dstlen) to gunzip() always 4 megabytes? } Maybe it could be set to the address that the image is loaded at / relocated to? } (0x180000 above) That way the gunzip function wouldn't overwrite the running code, } if I understand the dstlen argument correctly that is. } } I'm using a 2.4.18 kernel patched up to 2.4.19-pre9 with more patches to match } linuxppc_2_4 (downloaded from ppckernel.org). So if you've made any changes } recently then I don't have them. But I compared my bi_record code with the } latest code available via rsync and they look identical. } } thanks / } } magnus } } Tom Rini wrote: } > } > On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 04:54:47PM +0100, Magnus Damm wrote: } > } > > The bi_record setup code in linux/arch/ppc/boot/simple/misc-embedded.c } > > doesn't care about the initrd size. So, if you are using a initrd that } > > crosses a megabyte-boundary you will have your initrd overwritten with } > > the bi_record. This results in crc error when unpacking the initrd. } > > } > > The quick fix is to add a offset to the boot-code and to } > > arch/ppc/kernel/setup.c. } > > } > > So, what's the long term solution? } > > Passing a pointer to the kernel? } > } > Can you give more information about where everything is loaded up at? I } > thought this was a non-issue, but it's been a while since I tested } > initrds. } > } > -- } > Tom Rini (TR1265) } > http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ } ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/