linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit

To: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Specify initrd location using 64-bit
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:59:52 +0100
Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys.com>, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>, Aurelien Jacquiot <a-jacquiot@ti.com>, James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>, Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, Jonas Bonn <jonas@southpole.se>, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, x86@kernel.org, arm@kernel.org, Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>, Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org, linux-mips <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>, "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, devicetree-discuss <devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>
In-reply-to: <51CCA67C.2010803@gmail.com>
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: <1371775956-16453-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <51C4171C.9050908@linutronix.de> <51C48B5A.2040404@ti.com> <51CCA67C.2010803@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/21/2013 12:20 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>> On Friday 21 June 2013 05:04 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>> On 06/21/2013 02:52 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/kernel/prom.c b/arch/microblaze/kernel/prom.c
>>>> index 0a2c68f..62e2e8f 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/microblaze/kernel/prom.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/kernel/prom.c
>>>> @@ -136,8 +136,7 @@ void __init early_init_devtree(void *params)
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD
>>>> -void __init early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch(unsigned long start,
>>>> -           unsigned long end)
>>>> +void __init early_init_dt_setup_initrd_arch(u64 start, u64 end)
>>>>  {
>>>>     initrd_start = (unsigned long)__va(start);
>>>>     initrd_end = (unsigned long)__va(end);
>>>
>>> I think it would better to go here for phys_addr_t instead of u64. This
>>> would force you in of_flat_dt_match() to check if the value passed from
>>> DT specifies a memory address outside of 32bit address space and the
>>> kernel can't deal with this because its phys_addr_t is 32bit only due
>>> to a Kconfig switch.
>>>
>>> For x86, the initrd has to remain in the 32bit address space so passing
>>> the initrd in the upper range would violate the ABI. Not sure if this
>>> is true for other archs as well (ARM obviously not).
>>>
>> That pretty much means phys_addr_t. It will work for me as well but
>> in last thread from consistency with memory and reserved node, Rob
>> insisted to keep it as u64. So before I re-spin another version,
>> would like to here what Rob has to say considering the x86 requirement.
>>
>> Rob,
>> Are you ok with phys_addr_t since your concern was about rest
>> of the memory specific bits of the device-tree code use u64 ?
>
> No. I still think it should be u64 for same reasons I said originally.

+1

g.

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