Re: [PATCH][RFC] image: fdt: Fix DT relocation handling with multiple DRAM banks with gap
On 3/12/22 06:02, Simon Glass wrote: Hi Marek, On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 19:41, Marek Vasut wrote: On 3/12/22 03:24, Simon Glass wrote: Hi Marek, On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 18:05, Marek Vasut wrote: The current implementation of boot_relocate_fdt() places DT at the highest usable DRAM address, which is calculated as: env_get_bootm_low() + env_get_bootm_mapsize() which by default becomes gd->ram_base + gd->ram_size. Systems like i.MX53 can have multiple DRAM banks with gap between them, e.g. have DRAM at 0x7000-0x8fff and 0xb000-0xcfff , so for them the calculated highest DRAM address is 0xafff, which is exactly in the gap and thus not usable. Fix this by iterating over all DRAM banks and tracking the remaining amount of the total mapping size obtained from env_get_bootm_mapsize(). Limit the maximum LMB area size to each bank, to avoid using nonexistent DRAM. Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt Cc: Simon Glass Cc: Tom Rini --- common/image-fdt.c | 40 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Simon Glass Should we put this behind a Kconfig option to reduce code size? Since this depends on DT content, we cannot predict what kind of DT will be passed to U-Boot, so no, we cannot put this behind a Kconfig option. Doesn't it only affect boards with disjoint memory? Sure, it does trigger nasty unexpected failures on some systems. And you cannot really tell whether a board may or may not be populated with such a memory setup, because you cannot predict what will be in the DT. Besides, there is far more code which correctly does handle multiple memory areas and it is also not ifdef'd out, so I don't see why we should special case this one. That would only lead to inconsistency and more people running into this kind of problem and wasting a lot of time trying to figure out a fix, and then arriving at some loadaddr workaround instead.
Re: [PATCH][RFC] image: fdt: Fix DT relocation handling with multiple DRAM banks with gap
Hi Marek, On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 19:41, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 3/12/22 03:24, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 18:05, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> The current implementation of boot_relocate_fdt() places DT at the > >> highest usable DRAM address, which is calculated as: > >>env_get_bootm_low() + env_get_bootm_mapsize() > >> which by default becomes gd->ram_base + gd->ram_size. > >> > >> Systems like i.MX53 can have multiple DRAM banks with gap between them, > >> e.g. have DRAM at 0x7000-0x8fff and 0xb000-0xcfff , so > >> for them the calculated highest DRAM address is 0xafff, which is > >> exactly in the gap and thus not usable. > >> > >> Fix this by iterating over all DRAM banks and tracking the remaining > >> amount of the total mapping size obtained from env_get_bootm_mapsize(). > >> Limit the maximum LMB area size to each bank, to avoid using nonexistent > >> DRAM. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >> Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt > >> Cc: Simon Glass > >> Cc: Tom Rini > >> --- > >> common/image-fdt.c | 40 > >> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass > > > > Should we put this behind a Kconfig option to reduce code size? > > Since this depends on DT content, we cannot predict what kind of DT will > be passed to U-Boot, so no, we cannot put this behind a Kconfig option. Doesn't it only affect boards with disjoint memory? Regards, Simon
Re: [PATCH][RFC] image: fdt: Fix DT relocation handling with multiple DRAM banks with gap
On 3/12/22 03:24, Simon Glass wrote: Hi Marek, On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 18:05, Marek Vasut wrote: The current implementation of boot_relocate_fdt() places DT at the highest usable DRAM address, which is calculated as: env_get_bootm_low() + env_get_bootm_mapsize() which by default becomes gd->ram_base + gd->ram_size. Systems like i.MX53 can have multiple DRAM banks with gap between them, e.g. have DRAM at 0x7000-0x8fff and 0xb000-0xcfff , so for them the calculated highest DRAM address is 0xafff, which is exactly in the gap and thus not usable. Fix this by iterating over all DRAM banks and tracking the remaining amount of the total mapping size obtained from env_get_bootm_mapsize(). Limit the maximum LMB area size to each bank, to avoid using nonexistent DRAM. Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt Cc: Simon Glass Cc: Tom Rini --- common/image-fdt.c | 40 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Simon Glass Should we put this behind a Kconfig option to reduce code size? Since this depends on DT content, we cannot predict what kind of DT will be passed to U-Boot, so no, we cannot put this behind a Kconfig option.
Re: [PATCH][RFC] image: fdt: Fix DT relocation handling with multiple DRAM banks with gap
Hi Marek,
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 18:05, Marek Vasut wrote:
>
> The current implementation of boot_relocate_fdt() places DT at the
> highest usable DRAM address, which is calculated as:
> env_get_bootm_low() + env_get_bootm_mapsize()
> which by default becomes gd->ram_base + gd->ram_size.
>
> Systems like i.MX53 can have multiple DRAM banks with gap between them,
> e.g. have DRAM at 0x7000-0x8fff and 0xb000-0xcfff , so
> for them the calculated highest DRAM address is 0xafff, which is
> exactly in the gap and thus not usable.
>
> Fix this by iterating over all DRAM banks and tracking the remaining
> amount of the total mapping size obtained from env_get_bootm_mapsize().
> Limit the maximum LMB area size to each bank, to avoid using nonexistent
> DRAM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt
> Cc: Simon Glass
> Cc: Tom Rini
> ---
> common/image-fdt.c | 40
> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass
Should we put this behind a Kconfig option to reduce code size?
>
> diff --git a/common/image-fdt.c b/common/image-fdt.c
> index 327a8c4c395..2b199ffc2b1 100644
> --- a/common/image-fdt.c
> +++ b/common/image-fdt.c
> @@ -157,8 +157,11 @@ int boot_relocate_fdt(struct lmb *lmb, char
> **of_flat_tree, ulong *of_size)
> {
> void*fdt_blob = *of_flat_tree;
> void*of_start = NULL;
> + u64 start, size, usable;
> char*fdt_high;
> + ulong mapsize, low;
> ulong of_len = 0;
> + int bank;
> int err;
> int disable_relocation = 0;
>
> @@ -198,10 +201,39 @@ int boot_relocate_fdt(struct lmb *lmb, char
> **of_flat_tree, ulong *of_size)
> (void *)(ulong) lmb_alloc(lmb, of_len, 0x1000);
> }
> } else {
> - of_start =
> - (void *)(ulong) lmb_alloc_base(lmb, of_len, 0x1000,
> - env_get_bootm_mapsize()
> - + env_get_bootm_low());
> + mapsize = env_get_bootm_mapsize();
> + low = env_get_bootm_low();
> + of_start = NULL;
> +
> + for (bank = 0; bank < CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS; bank++) {
> + start = gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].start;
> + size = gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].size;
> +
> + /* DRAM bank addresses are too low, skip it. */
> + if (start + size < low)
> + continue;
> +
> + usable = min(size, (u64)mapsize);
> +
> + /*
> +* At least part of this DRAM bank is usable, try
> +* using it for LMB allocation.
> +*/
> + of_start =
> + (void *)(ulong) lmb_alloc_base(lmb, of_len,
> 0x1000,
> + start + usable);
> + /* Allocation succeeded, use this block. */
> + if (of_start != NULL)
> + break;
> +
> + /*
> +* Reduce the mapping size in the next bank
> +* by the size of attempt in current bank.
> +*/
> + mapsize -= usable - max(start, (u64)low);
> + if (!mapsize)
> + break;
> + }
> }
>
> if (of_start == NULL) {
> --
> 2.30.2
>
Regards,
Simon
[PATCH][RFC] image: fdt: Fix DT relocation handling with multiple DRAM banks with gap
The current implementation of boot_relocate_fdt() places DT at the
highest usable DRAM address, which is calculated as:
env_get_bootm_low() + env_get_bootm_mapsize()
which by default becomes gd->ram_base + gd->ram_size.
Systems like i.MX53 can have multiple DRAM banks with gap between them,
e.g. have DRAM at 0x7000-0x8fff and 0xb000-0xcfff , so
for them the calculated highest DRAM address is 0xafff, which is
exactly in the gap and thus not usable.
Fix this by iterating over all DRAM banks and tracking the remaining
amount of the total mapping size obtained from env_get_bootm_mapsize().
Limit the maximum LMB area size to each bank, to avoid using nonexistent
DRAM.
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt
Cc: Simon Glass
Cc: Tom Rini
---
common/image-fdt.c | 40
1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/image-fdt.c b/common/image-fdt.c
index 327a8c4c395..2b199ffc2b1 100644
--- a/common/image-fdt.c
+++ b/common/image-fdt.c
@@ -157,8 +157,11 @@ int boot_relocate_fdt(struct lmb *lmb, char
**of_flat_tree, ulong *of_size)
{
void*fdt_blob = *of_flat_tree;
void*of_start = NULL;
+ u64 start, size, usable;
char*fdt_high;
+ ulong mapsize, low;
ulong of_len = 0;
+ int bank;
int err;
int disable_relocation = 0;
@@ -198,10 +201,39 @@ int boot_relocate_fdt(struct lmb *lmb, char
**of_flat_tree, ulong *of_size)
(void *)(ulong) lmb_alloc(lmb, of_len, 0x1000);
}
} else {
- of_start =
- (void *)(ulong) lmb_alloc_base(lmb, of_len, 0x1000,
- env_get_bootm_mapsize()
- + env_get_bootm_low());
+ mapsize = env_get_bootm_mapsize();
+ low = env_get_bootm_low();
+ of_start = NULL;
+
+ for (bank = 0; bank < CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS; bank++) {
+ start = gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].start;
+ size = gd->bd->bi_dram[bank].size;
+
+ /* DRAM bank addresses are too low, skip it. */
+ if (start + size < low)
+ continue;
+
+ usable = min(size, (u64)mapsize);
+
+ /*
+* At least part of this DRAM bank is usable, try
+* using it for LMB allocation.
+*/
+ of_start =
+ (void *)(ulong) lmb_alloc_base(lmb, of_len, 0x1000,
+ start + usable);
+ /* Allocation succeeded, use this block. */
+ if (of_start != NULL)
+ break;
+
+ /*
+* Reduce the mapping size in the next bank
+* by the size of attempt in current bank.
+*/
+ mapsize -= usable - max(start, (u64)low);
+ if (!mapsize)
+ break;
+ }
}
if (of_start == NULL) {
--
2.30.2
