From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:21:07 -0500 Subject: [U-Boot] mpc85xx debug TLB entry In-Reply-To: <50768AE7.9090404@freescale.com> (from prabhakar@freescale.com on Thu Oct 11 04:01:27 2012) Message-ID: <1349968867.6903.1@snotra> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 10/11/2012 04:01:27 AM, Prabhakar Kushwaha wrote: > On 10/11/2012 05:51 AM, Scott Wood wrote: >> I'm debugging some SPL changes and am still having a hard time >> following the initial TLB flow. We seem to be creating an entry in >> AS0 -- how is that not conflicting with the TLB entry we're running >> from? > > The behaviour of overlapping TLB entries is undefined for e500v2 > processor. > Luckily it is working for P1010RDB, P1020RDB, P2020RDB-PC and > BSC9131RDB. > >> Why is the debug TLB 256K? Why is it not aligned to 256K? > > Temp TLB is created because label "nexti" resize the current TLB > to 4K. So create one for debugging with CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE. > Although we are creating TLB entry for 0x11001000 but actual TLB > entry is created with 0x11000000,256K aligned. Same is verified from > debugger. You shouldn't rely on the hardware to ignore the lower bits of the address. Why does it need to be 256K? >> How do you know that MAS2_I is correct (it should be cacheable in >> the loaded-by-spl case)? > > I set it as MAS2_I because same is done while creating AS1 TLB > entries for CONFIG_SYS_MONITOR_BASE during CONFIG_SYS_RAMBOOT. > >> >> I'm trying to get the p2020rdb-pca SPL payload to run out of L2 >> SRAM, and I see weird TLB behavior causing a hang if I don't comment >> out the debug TLB. >> >> > is the root cause MAS2_I or 256K TLB entries created? It's not MAS2_I, as it happens even when I have all the other SRAM mappings cache inhibited. I don't know what the root cause is. > The proper solution would be to create temp Debug TLB for > CONFIG_SYS_RAMBOOT after resizing current TLB to 4K. > Please suggest. I suggest you do so. :-) In the meantime, I'll remove it for RAMBOOT/SPL as it's broken. -Scott