[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANBLGcyqOKgoQr3EWvgTKewj9PtbzZ4STOz5KXHm78JQYc0G4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2021 16:12:56 +0200
From: Emil Renner Berthing <emil.renner.berthing@...il.com>
To: Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -fixes 0/3] Fixes regarding CONFIG_PHYS_RAM_BASE
On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 at 10:00, Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr> wrote:
>
> The following commits:
>
> 7094e6acaf7a ("riscv: Simplify xip and !xip kernel address conversion macros")
> 9b79878ced8f ("riscv: Remove CONFIG_PHYS_RAM_BASE_FIXED")
>
> expose CONFIG_PHYS_RAM_BASE for all kernel types whereas this value is
> implementation-specific, so that breaks the kernel genericity.
>
> The first patch in this patchset removes the usage of CONFIG_PHYS_RAM_BASE
> by introducing a new global variable that holds this value.
>
> The second patch reverts 9b79878ced8f ("riscv: Remove
> CONFIG_PHYS_RAM_BASE_FIXED").
>
> The last patch is an optimization 'symmetrical' to the one introduced in
> the first patch: this is not a fix, then it is not necessary to pull
> this into -fixes.
Hi Alex,
Thank you, this works fine on my BeagleV Beta board.
If I'm not mistaken after this series all uses of CONFIG_PHYS_RAM if
protected by #ifdef CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL, so maybe we can remove the
middleman, CONFIG_PHYS_RAM_BASE_FIXED, and just let CONFIG_PHYS_RAM
directly depend on CONFIG_XIP_KERNEL.
Don't let that delay this series though. I'd still rather have this
fixed in 5.14 as is.
If it makes any difference you can add this for the series:
Tested-by: Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@...il.dk>
/Emil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists