Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: LPAE: load upper bits of early TTBR0/TTBR1

From: Will Deacon
Date: Tue Jul 29 2014 - 07:16:58 EST


On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 07:47:41PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 07:40:58PM +0100, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 04:36:23PM +0100, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> > >> This patch fixes booting when idmap pgd lays above 4gb. Commit
> > >> 4756dcbfd37 mostly had fixed this, but it'd failed to load upper bits.
> > >>
> > >> Also this fixes adding TTBR1_OFFSET to TTRR1: if lower part overflows
> > >> carry flag must be added to the upper part.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Khlebnikov <k.khlebnikov@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> Cc: Cyril Chemparathy <cyril@xxxxxx>
> > >> Cc: Vitaly Andrianov <vitalya@xxxxxx>
> > >> ---
> > >> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 7 +++----
> > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> > >> index 22e3ad6..f0481dd 100644
> > >> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> > >> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> > >> @@ -140,12 +140,11 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
> > >> mov \tmp, \ttbr1, lsr #(32 - ARCH_PGD_SHIFT) @ upper bits
> > >> mov \ttbr1, \ttbr1, lsl #ARCH_PGD_SHIFT @ lower bits
> > >> addls \ttbr1, \ttbr1, #TTBR1_OFFSET
> > >> - mcrr p15, 1, \ttbr1, \zero, c2 @ load TTBR1
> > >> + adcls \tmp, \tmp, #0
> > >> + mcrr p15, 1, \ttbr1, \tmp, c2 @ load TTBR1
> > >> mov \tmp, \ttbr0, lsr #(32 - ARCH_PGD_SHIFT) @ upper bits
> > >> mov \ttbr0, \ttbr0, lsl #ARCH_PGD_SHIFT @ lower bits
> > >> - mcrr p15, 0, \ttbr0, \zero, c2 @ load TTBR0
> > >> - mcrr p15, 1, \ttbr1, \zero, c2 @ load TTBR1
> > >> - mcrr p15, 0, \ttbr0, \zero, c2 @ load TTBR0
> > >> + mcrr p15, 0, \ttbr0, \tmp, c2 @ load TTBR0
> > >
> > > I must admit, the code you are removing here looks really strange. Was there
> > > a badly resolved conflict somewhere along the way? It would be nice to see
> > > if your fix (which seems ok to me) was actually present in the mailing list
> > > posting of the patch that ended in the above mess.
> >
> > Nope, no merge conflicts, source in original patch
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/11/346
> >
> > That mess completely harmless, this code is used only once on boot.
> > I don't have that email, so replying isn't trivial for me.
>
> How bizarre. Also, Cyril doesn't work for TI anymore (his email is
> bouncing), so it's tricky to know what he meant here.
>
> Your patch looks better than what we currently have though. Have you managed
> to test it on a keystone platform (I don't have one)?

Given that:

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>

Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/