[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FDF804A.5080404@monstr.eu>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 21:23:54 +0200
From: Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@...alogix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] ARM: vmlinux.lds: Setup physical load address
not virtual
On 06/18/2012 09:02 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>> 2012/6/18 Nicolas Pitre<nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
>>
>>> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>> Setup correct virtual and physical address in ELF LOAD section.
>>>
>>> We are moving to a single kernel binary for multiple targets, including
>>> targets with different physical load addresses. The kernel code figures
>>> out at run time what the actual physical address is when
>>> CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT is set which is the default these days. In
>>> other words, we don't know the physical offset at build time in that
>>> case and CONFIG_PHYS_OFFSET is simply not defined.
>>>
>>
>> ok. good to know and nice features. In that case I expect that you are
>> using any binary format and you copy it to memory and run it. Code
>> find out where it runs and based on that setup things.
>
> Exact.
ok. One more question about this feature. What is the alignment for it?
I mean I have done the similar feature for Xilinx ppc440 and alignment depends on
MMU TLB size.
>
>> (BTW: This is very interesting for me to implement it on Microblaze. Can
>> you point me to that kernel code part? or any doc?)
>
> You could have a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Specs/ARMSingleKernel,
> especially the section "Optimized virt_to_phys() with a runtime
> determined PHYS_OFFSET".
>
> Then the following commits should be of interest:
>
> 72a20e22f4 "ARM: P2V: eliminate head.S use of PHYS_OFFSET for !XIP_KERNEL"
>
> dc21af99fa "ARM: P2V: introduce phys_to_virt/virt_to_phys runtime patching"
ok. Thanks will look at it.
>
>> But can you do it with elf?
>
> No.
ok
>
>> Please correct me if I am wrong IRC ARM Qemu uses zImage but it is no
>> problem to use elf file. For this case
>> Qemu elf loader also uses physical addresses from ELF and also entry point.
>
> If you want to use the ELF image, then you need to hardcode the physical
> memory location in its header, and that's something we want to get away
> from because it prevents a single kernel binary image from being used on
> different targets with different memory layouts. Same issue with
> u-Boot's legacy uImage format.
And are you able to get these information away from ELF? Or you just need to set it up
to any default value. I would expect to 0x0.
>
>> I haven't played with CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT option but what is elf
>> entry point for this case?
>
> For the kernel image itself it is the kernel virtual address.
Is it used somewhere? Or is it just setup to virtual address and no code use it?
I mean that kernel virtual entry point.
I expect that if CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT=y then CONFIG_PHYS_OFFSET is not setup
Then LOAD_OFFSET should be equal to CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET.
>
> For the relocatable zImage decompressor wrapper it is 0.
ok.
Thanks,
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists