From: Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>
To: Emanuele Ghidoli <ghidoliemanuele@gmail.com>
Cc: "Francis, Neha" <n-francis@ti.com>,
Stefan Eichenberger <eichest@gmail.com>,
Francesco Dolcini <francesco@dolcini.it>,
stefan.eichenberger@toradex.com, s-k6@ti.com, w.egorov@phytec.de,
emanuele.ghidoli@toradex.com, francesco.dolcini@toradex.com,
u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] common/memsize.c: Fix get_ram_size() original data restore
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2026 11:39:22 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260227173922.GV1593142@bill-the-cat> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <34966334-4658-4fe2-8b6f-550969c1f91f@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5351 bytes --]
On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 11:39:44AM +0100, Emanuele Ghidoli wrote:
>
>
> On 2/27/26 11:13, Francis, Neha wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2/26/2026 10:01 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 05:30:06PM +0100, Stefan Eichenberger wrote:
> >>> Hi Francesco and Tom,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 05:11:49PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >>>> +Emanuele
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello Tom,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 08:23:45AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 08:05:02AM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> >>>>>> Hello Tom,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 11:06:49AM +0100, Stefan Eichenberger wrote:
> >>>>>>> From: Stefan Eichenberger <stefan.eichenberger@toradex.com>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The get_ram_size() function fails to restore the original RAM data when
> >>>>>>> the data cache is enabled. This issue was observed on an AM625 R5 SPL
> >>>>>>> with 512MB of RAM and is a regression that became visible with
> >>>>>>> commit bc07851897bd ("board: ti: Pull redundant DDR functions to a common
> >>>>>>> location and Fixup DDR size when ECC is enabled").
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Observed boot failure messages:
> >>>>>>> Warning: Did not detect image signing certificate. Skipping authentication to prevent boot failure. This will fail on Security Enforcing(HS-SE) devices
> >>>>>>> Authentication passed
> >>>>>>> Starting ATF on ARM64 core...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The system then hangs. This indicates that without a data cache flush,
> >>>>>>> data in the cache is not coherent with RAM, preventing the system from
> >>>>>>> booting. This was verified by printing the content of this address when
> >>>>>>> the issue occurs.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Add a data cache flush after each restore operation to resolve this
> >>>>>>> issue.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Fixes: bc07851897bd ("board: ti: Pull redundant DDR functions to a common location and Fixup DDR size when ECC is enabled")
> >>>>>>> Fixes: 1c64b98c1ec4 ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_ram_size() when cache is enabled")
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Eichenberger <stefan.eichenberger@toradex.com>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Tom, can we merge this?
> >>>>>> This is the last bit to solve the regression reported here,
> >>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260224152405.GD340942@francesco-nb/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I wasn't happy with this at the time, and Stefan's last email in the
> >>>>> thread left me with the impression more investigation was needed and
> >>>>> likely something else was the root cause.
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe that this patch is needed.
> >>>>
> >>>> On AM62 what is happening is the following.
> >>>>
> >>>> We have a cortex-R5 that is the first core booting (there is also a
> >>>> cortex-m4, but it's not relevant for this discussion).
> >>>>
> >>>> It runs from internal memory and it configures the DDR ram
> >>>>
> >>>> We load to DDR memory various pieces of firmware (TFA, U-Boot for the
> >>>> cortex A53, ...)
> >>>>
> >>>> We do execute get_ram_size(), that read/write the memory, and it is
> >>>> supposed to restore it back the original content
> >>>>
> >>>> However when we have the cache enabled, we might miss to write back the
> >>>> original memory content, where the other pieces of firmware are.
> >>>>
> >>>> And after that we start the cortex A53, running in DDR, and there the
> >>>> memory content might not be correct, because there is no cache coherency
> >>>> between the cortex-A and the cortex-R. And because of that we have
> >>>> crashes.
> >>>>
> >>>> Stefan: any comment here? Can you help?
> >>>
> >>> I think what you wrote summarises the issue well. If I recall correctly,
> >>> I "fixed" the issue last time by simply calling get_ram_size() once
> >>> before enabling the cache. This was in commit 4164289db882e. The SPL
> >>> then informs U-Boot of the memory size via fdt fixup. However, something
> >>> has probably changed now (possibly in the R5 SPL), meaning the cache is
> >>> enabled earlier, so the cache is enabled again when get_ram_size() is
> >>> called.
> >>>
> >>> For the AMP use case, either "get_ram_size" should not be called once
> >>> the cache is enabled, or a similar patch to the one I proposed is
> >>> required.
> >>
> >> I would lean towards the former if at all possible.
> >>
> >
> > Just trying to understand, what is the reasoning behind ensuring get_ram_size is
> > not called if cache is not enabled? Wasn't get_ram_size written with the
> > possibility of cache being enabled (existence of dcache_en logic); then this
> > patch is a valid fix right?
> >
> > In parallel, I do agree we need to have a code analysis w.r.t dram_init, we are
> > making certain cache and dram calls spuriously making this confusing.
> >
>
> Hello Tom,
> I agree with Francis.
>
> When I proposed commit 1c64b98c1ec4 ("common/memsize.c: Fix get_ram_size()
> when cache is enabled"), I was not considering the presence of other actors
> (other cores, DMA engines, etc.).
>
> That patch fixes what I had overlooked at the time. We need to restore the
> actual RAM contents, not only what is perceived by the core executing
> get_ram_size().
>
> To me this patch sounds intrinsically correct.
Alright. Can I please get some Reviewed / Tested by tags? Thanks.
--
Tom
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-27 17:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-14 10:06 [PATCH v1] common/memsize.c: Fix get_ram_size() original data restore Stefan Eichenberger
2025-03-14 13:28 ` Francesco Dolcini
2025-03-14 16:34 ` Tom Rini
2025-03-17 14:25 ` Stefan Eichenberger
2026-02-26 7:05 ` Francesco Dolcini
2026-02-26 14:23 ` Tom Rini
2026-02-26 16:11 ` Francesco Dolcini
2026-02-26 16:30 ` Stefan Eichenberger
2026-02-26 16:31 ` Tom Rini
2026-02-27 10:13 ` Francis, Neha
2026-02-27 10:39 ` Emanuele Ghidoli
2026-02-27 17:39 ` Tom Rini [this message]
2026-03-02 11:13 ` Emanuele Ghidoli
2026-02-27 10:40 ` Francesco Dolcini
2026-03-02 7:41 ` Francesco Dolcini
2026-03-02 22:10 ` Tom Rini
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=20260227173922.GV1593142@bill-the-cat \
--to=trini@konsulko.com \
--cc=eichest@gmail.com \
--cc=emanuele.ghidoli@toradex.com \
--cc=francesco.dolcini@toradex.com \
--cc=francesco@dolcini.it \
--cc=ghidoliemanuele@gmail.com \
--cc=n-francis@ti.com \
--cc=s-k6@ti.com \
--cc=stefan.eichenberger@toradex.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
--cc=w.egorov@phytec.de \
/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