[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220217083734.1903109-1-si.hao@zte.com.cn>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 08:37:34 +0000
From: cgel.zte@...il.com
To: catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
pasha.tatashin@...een.com, si.hao@....com.cn,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yang.yang29@....com.cn, zealci@....com.cn
Subject: [PATCH v2] arm64: kexec: Support the case of VA_BITS=39 in trans_pgd_idmap_page()
From: sihao <si.hao@....com.cn>
fsl64() may get different values due to different physical addresses. Is
it possible to confirm the value of max_msb with CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS?
Reported-by: sihao <si.hao@....com.cn>
Signed-off-by: sihao <si.hao@....com.cn>
Reviewed-by: CatalinMarinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
---
Changes in V1:
Refer to: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220121065216.1001021-1-si.hao@zte.com.cn/
When the values of CONFIG_ARM64_VA_BITS and CONFIG_ARM64_PA_BITS are not
equal, the following panic occurs when kexec is executed.
This happens because trans_pgd_idmap_page() does not support VA_BITS=39.
So the patch supports the case of VA_BITS=39.
arch/arm64/mm/trans_pgd.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/trans_pgd.c b/arch/arm64/mm/trans_pgd.c
index d7da8ca40d2e..23c74f9c5790 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/trans_pgd.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/trans_pgd.c
@@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ int trans_pgd_idmap_page(struct trans_pgd_info *info, phys_addr_t *trans_ttbr0,
{
phys_addr_t dst_addr = virt_to_phys(page);
unsigned long pfn = __phys_to_pfn(dst_addr);
- int max_msb = (dst_addr & GENMASK(52, 48)) ? 51 : 47;
+ int max_msb = VA_BITS - 1;
int bits_mapped = PAGE_SHIFT - 4;
unsigned long level_mask, prev_level_entry, *levels[4];
int this_level, index, level_lsb, level_msb;
--
2.25.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists