Re: [PATCH] ARM: avoid mis-detecting some V7 cores in the decompressor

Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-06-03T22:23:45Z

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 02:13:39PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Resending due to rmk's vacation.
>
> On 05/24/13 15:05, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > I've noticed another problem now that our caches are used. On MSM
> > we have TEXT_OFFSET set to at least 0x208000 if we've built-in
> > support for MSM8x60/8960. If I boot a kernel with the MSM code
> > built-in that requires the higher text offset, but I load my
> > compressed kernel below that address (such as 0x0) the
> > decompression fails.
> >
> > This happens because the page tables are written into the
> > compressed data region before we relocate ourself to a higher
> > location.

We've always required kernel images to be loaded above RAM+32K for
exactly this issue.

> > This is bad because we just wrote our page tables into the
> > compressed data. Nobody notices though and we finish relocating
> > ourselves and then we call decompress_kernel() which fails
> > randomly. (BTW, why does error() sit in a while loop forever?

It loops forever because there is _nothing_ else to be done. It's
already printed a message explaining why stuff has failed:

void error(char *x)
{
arch_error(x);

putstr("\n\n");
putstr(x);
putstr("\n\n -- System halted");

while(1); /* Halt */
}

and the while loop is to prevent us trying to do something stupid
after failure. Basically, error() never returns.

I've no idea why you say the following:

> > We
> > can't get any information about why the decompression failed if
> > we have debug_ll enabled. I had to patch the error() routine to
> > not while loop forever to get that print after do_decompress to
> > be useful.)

Maybe your implementation of puts() for the decompressor is faulty then?
Because it works for me - when something goes wrong with the decompression,
I get a message such as:

Decompressing kernel...

CRC error

-- System halted

> > I see a few solutions.
> >
> > 1) Relocate with caches off and then turn on caches after we're
> > running in a location where we won't overwrite ourselves.
> >
> > 2) Have temporary page tables for the relocation phase that live
> > just below the location we're going to relocate to.
> >
> > 3) Force bootloaders loading these types of images to load the
> > zImage at least as high as the TEXT_OFFSET is compiled to.
> >
> > I don't think we can convince everyone that #3 is ok to do. I'm
> > leaning towards #2 since we get all the benefits of the cache
> > during the relocation phase but #1 is the obviously simple fix.

(3) is what we've always required in the past. We already have code
to relocate the compressed image, so we _might_ be able to do (1).

The easy solution is to continue saying "minimum of RAM start + 32K"
as we've always had in the past though.