linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "MIPS: make CAC_ADDR and UNCAC_ADDR account for PH

To: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "MIPS: make CAC_ADDR and UNCAC_ADDR account for PHYS_OFFSET"
From: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:43:35 +0000
Accept-language: en-US
Cc: "Steven J. Hill" <Steven.Hill@imgtec.com>, "linux-mips@linux-mips.org" <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, Florian Fainelli <florian@openwrt.org>
In-reply-to: <20130626145234.GB7171@linux-mips.org>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1371742590-10138-1-git-send-email-Steven.Hill@imgtec.com>,<20130626145234.GB7171@linux-mips.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Thread-index: AQHObcv38iGve3vzvUORHZK08vTPDplIk1UA//+Y6Yw=
Thread-topic: [PATCH v2] Revert "MIPS: make CAC_ADDR and UNCAC_ADDR account for PHYS_OFFSET"
This is a precursor for EVA specs implementation on Aptiv cores.

EVA has different virtual address sets for kernel and user space and it can use 
memory on different physical address location. For exam, on Malta it can use a 
natural 0x80000000, one our customer put memory into 0x40000000 etc.

- Leonid.


Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> wrote:


On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 10:36:30AM -0500, Steven J. Hill wrote:

> From: Leonid Yegoshin <Leonid.Yegoshin@imgtec.com>
>
> This reverts commit 3f4579252aa166641861a64f1c2883365ca126c2. It is
> invalid because the macros CAC_ADDR and UNCAC_ADDR have a kernel
> virtual address as an argument and also returns a kernel virtual
> address. Using and physical address PHYS_OFFSET is blatantly wrong
> for a macro common to multiple platforms.

While the patch itself is looking sane at a glance, I'm wondering if this
is fixing any actual bug or is just the result of a code review?

  Ralf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>