On 29 January 2016 at 16:10, Stephen Warren <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Stephen Warren <[email protected]> > > On some systems, RAM starts at address 0. If the user executes itest > against address 0 on such a system, it will call map_physmem(0, ...) > which will return 0 back; mapping only changes the address on sandbox. > This causes itest to believe map_physmem() has failed, and hence fails > the comparison. > > Fix itest so that it allows map_physmem() to return 0 /if/ the orignal > address passed to it was also 0. > > This fixes "tegra-uboot-flasher flash" on Tegra20. > > This has the disadvantage that on sandbox, failed mapping attempts for > address 0 are not detected. Instead, should the code only call > map_physmem() on sandbox? Or, should map_physmem() return its error status > some other way. Or, should the special case only be allowed on systems > where the base of RAM is 0 somehow? > > Fixes: 7861204c9af7 ("itest: make memory access work under sandbox") > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <[email protected]> > --- > Another approach would be to fix the scripts generated by t-u-f to use > some other address, e.g. address 4. However, I think itest should work > on any legal address in RAM? > > common/cmd_itest.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Acked-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> This seems OK. I don't think we care about the case where sandbox can't get to its memory. But if you want to improve this, I'd favour a new function that returns an error code and puts the return pointer in a parameter, like int map_physmem_ptr(phys_addr_t paddr, ulong len, ulong flags, void **ptrp) > > diff --git a/common/cmd_itest.c b/common/cmd_itest.c > index 91ae5c2704c8..fb4d797e43d7 100644 > --- a/common/cmd_itest.c > +++ b/common/cmd_itest.c > @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ static long evalexp(char *s, int w) > if (s[0] == '*') { > addr = simple_strtoul(&s[1], NULL, 16); > buf = map_physmem(addr, w, MAP_WRBACK); > - if (!buf) { > + if (!buf && addr) { > puts("Failed to map physical memory\n"); > return 0; > } > -- > 2.7.0 > Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
