Hi Folks,
I hope you are all doing well!
Is it possible this patch to get some attention?
Thanks!
Regards,
Aleksandar
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com>
Sent: Freitag, 30. April 2021 13:53
To: Aleksandar Gerasimovski <aleksandar.gerasimov...@hitachi-powergrids.com>;
Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delau...@foss.st.com>; Michal Simek
<michal.si...@xilinx.com>; . Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschm...@gmail.com>
Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: bootm: wrong lmb region reservation when PRAM is used
On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 09:46:49PM +0000, Aleksandar Gerasimovski wrote:
> This is a draft patch to describe the problem and to initiate a
> discussion for solution.
>
> PRAM usage is not taken into account when reserving lmb for ARM
> architecture, this means that predefined PRAM region is reserved by
> the u-boot and cannot be used by the u-boot users.
>
> In our case this bug leads to non functional ramfs boot, as the PRAM
> and ram rootfs address ranges are getting reserved by the u-boot.
>
> It is obvious that here PRAM region is ignored, but my question is is
> this clear to everyone and expected?
>
> Taking board_f.c as reference, when calculating relocation address
> PRAM area is taken into account so I would expect that to be case here.
> Here the intention is to reserve unused space at the end of the
> effective RAM but PRAM is not part of that.
>
> Possible solution would be to introduce something like
> get_effective_memsize here e.g powerpc/lib/bootm.c but then also
> NR_DRAM_BANKS has to be considered?
>
> Signed-off-by: Aleksandar Gerasimovski
> <aleksandar.gerasimov...@hitachi-powergrids.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/lib/bootm.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c b/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c index
> 11af9e2..4b06d25 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/lib/bootm.c
> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static ulong get_sp(void)
>
> void arch_lmb_reserve(struct lmb *lmb) {
> - ulong sp, bank_end;
> + ulong sp, bank_end, pram = 0;
> int bank;
>
> /*
> @@ -69,6 +69,11 @@ void arch_lmb_reserve(struct lmb *lmb)
> sp = get_sp();
> debug("## Current stack ends at 0x%08lx ", sp);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PRAM
> + pram = env_get_ulong("pram", 10, CONFIG_PRAM);
> + pram = pram << 10; /* size is in kB */
> +#endif
> +
> /* adjust sp by 4K to be safe */
> sp -= 4096;
> for (bank = 0; bank < CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS; bank++) { @@ -76,8 +81,9
> @@ void arch_lmb_reserve(struct lmb *lmb)
> sp < gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].start)
> continue;
> /* Watch out for RAM at end of address space! */
> + /* @todo: pram obviously wrong if NR_DRAM_BANKS > 1 */
> bank_end = gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].start +
> - gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].size - 1;
> + gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].size - pram - 1;
> if (sp > bank_end)
> continue;
> if (bank_end > gd->ram_top)
Adding a few folks who have touched lmb code relatively recently for their
thoughts. Thanks!
--
Tom
