Hi Matthias,
On 05.05.2020 16:00, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> On 04/05/2020 14:45, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
>> From: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprow...@samsung.com>
>>
>> Create a non-cacheable mapping for the 0x600000000 physical memory region,
>> where MMIO registers for the PCIe XHCI controller are instantiated by the
>> PCIe bridge.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprow...@samsung.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawro...@samsung.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulie...@suse.de>
>> ---
>> Changes since v1:
>> - none.
>> ---
>> arch/arm/mach-bcm283x/init.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-bcm283x/init.c b/arch/arm/mach-bcm283x/init.c
>> index 4295356..6a748da 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-bcm283x/init.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-bcm283x/init.c
>> @@ -11,10 +11,15 @@
>> #include <dm/device.h>
>> #include <fdt_support.h>
>>
>> +#define BCM2711_RPI4_PCIE_XHCI_MMIO_PHYS 0x600000000UL
>> +#define BCM2711_RPI4_PCIE_XHCI_MMIO_SIZE 0x800000UL
>> +
>> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64
>> #include <asm/armv8/mmu.h>
>>
>> -static struct mm_region bcm283x_mem_map[] = {
>> +#define MAX_MAP_MAX_ENTRIES (4)
> What stands the second 'MAX' for?
a simple copy/paste issue. I will fix it.
>> +
>> +static struct mm_region bcm283x_mem_map[MAX_MAP_MAX_ENTRIES] = {
>> {
>> .virt = 0x00000000UL,
>> .phys = 0x00000000UL,
>> @@ -34,7 +39,7 @@ static struct mm_region bcm283x_mem_map[] = {
>> }
>> };
>>
>> -static struct mm_region bcm2711_mem_map[] = {
>> +static struct mm_region bcm2711_mem_map[MAX_MAP_MAX_ENTRIES] = {
>> {
>> .virt = 0x00000000UL,
>> .phys = 0x00000000UL,
>> @@ -49,6 +54,13 @@ static struct mm_region bcm2711_mem_map[] = {
>> PTE_BLOCK_NON_SHARE |
>> PTE_BLOCK_PXN | PTE_BLOCK_UXN
>> }, {
> I'd prefer a comment instead of using the BCM2711_RPI4_PCIE_XHCI_MMIO_*
> defines.
Those defines are also used in ARM 32bit code.
>> + .virt = BCM2711_RPI4_PCIE_XHCI_MMIO_PHYS> + .phys =
>> BCM2711_RPI4_PCIE_XHCI_MMIO_PHYS,
>> + .size = BCM2711_RPI4_PCIE_XHCI_MMIO_SIZE,
>> + .attrs = PTE_BLOCK_MEMTYPE(MT_DEVICE_NGNRNE) |
>> + PTE_BLOCK_NON_SHARE |
>> + PTE_BLOCK_PXN | PTE_BLOCK_UXN
>> + }, {
>> /* List terminator */
>> 0,
>> }
>> @@ -71,7 +83,7 @@ static void _rpi_update_mem_map(struct mm_region *pd)
>> {
>> int i;
>>
>> - for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < MAX_MAP_MAX_ENTRIES; i++) {
> Variable mem_map points to bcm283x_mem_map which only holds two mm_region's
> (plus list terminator). So we have an overflow here.
Nope, I've changed the bcm283x_mem_map to be large enough, see the above
diff.
> I think we should just
> define bcm2711_mem_map and bcm283x_mem_map with a fixed array size of 4 (see
> comment on the define naming above).
That's exactly what I did.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski, PhD
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
