linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: correct i.MX93 DRAM mapping

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <DU0PR04MB941731CA8DD04715E9DDC8B388079@DU0PR04MB9417.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 02:52:43 +0000
From:   Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
To:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
CC:     "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>,
        "andersson@...nel.org" <andersson@...nel.org>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
        dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
        "linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: correct i.MX93 DRAM mapping

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: correct i.MX93 DRAM mapping
> 
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 12:27:58AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
> > > Sent: 2022年11月4日 23:28
> > > To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > Cc: Peng Fan (OSS) <peng.fan@....nxp.com>; andersson@...nel.org;
> > > shawnguo@...nel.org; s.hauer@...gutronix.de;
> kernel@...gutronix.de;
> > > festevam@...il.com; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>; linux-
> > > remoteproc@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org;
> > > linux- kernel@...r.kernel.org
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: correct i.MX93 DRAM
> > > mapping
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 06:11:46AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: imx_rproc: correct i.MX93 DRAM
> > > > > mapping
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 at 05:12, Peng Fan (OSS)
> > > > > <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to updated reference mannual, the M33 DRAM view of
> > > > > > 0x[C,D]0000000 maps to A55 0xC0000000, so correct it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fixes: 9222fabf0e39 ("remoteproc: imx_rproc: Support i.MX93")
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c | 4 ++--
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> > > > > > b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c index
> > > > > > 2c471e46f4ca..9fc978e0393c
> > > > > > 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/imx_rproc.c
> > > > > > @@ -134,8 +134,8 @@ static const struct imx_rproc_att
> > > > > imx_rproc_att_imx93[] = {
> > > > > >         { 0x80000000, 0x80000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> > > > > >         { 0x90000000, 0x80000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -       { 0xC0000000, 0xa0000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> > > > > > -       { 0xD0000000, 0xa0000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> > > > > > +       { 0xC0000000, 0xC0000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> > > > > > +       { 0xD0000000, 0xC0000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
> > > > >
> > > > > But how did this work before?  Were some SoC released with the
> > > > > old mapping?
> > >
> > > As it is regularly the case, you have not answered all my questions.
> >
> > The DRAM mapping was not tested, I just wrote them down according to
> > the information I had.  In this patch, I just fix the mapping at
> > address 0xC0000000, I not add 0xA0000000, I may also add it or use a
> > separate patch, which would you prefer?
> 
> Seperate patch?  This is a seperate patch...

I mean the DRAM mapping still not cover 0xA0000000, 0xB0000000.  The
current mapping is below:
        /* DDR */
        { 0x80000000, 0x80000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
        { 0x90000000, 0x80000000, 0x10000000, 0 },

        { 0xC0000000, 0xc0000000, 0x10000000, 0 },
        { 0xD0000000, 0xc0000000, 0x10000000, 0 },

For 0xA/B0000000, I could add later when I get an M33 image that
really use that address in future.
> 
> >
> > The i.MX93 SoC is still in pre-production phase, and there is no
> > public Information for now.
> >
> 
> That is all I wanted to know.  Other implementation can't be affected by this
> change because the sillicon is still under development.  Simple isn't?
> 
> I am applying this patch.

Others are not affected.

Thanks,
Peng.
> 
> > Regards,
> > Peng.
> > >
> > > > The current m33 firmware release with Linux SDK only has TCM
> > > > version, so I not have image to test the DDR mapping.
> > > >
> > > > Initially we got the information that M33 mapping of DRAM.
> > > > DRAM (offset 0 MB)	DRAM	80000000
> > > > DRAM (offset 256 MB)	DRAM	A0000000
> > > > DRAM (offset 512 MB)	DRAM	C0000000
> > > >
> > > > However the information is wrong after we check more, there is an
> > > > 256MB hole, 0MB [0x80000000, 0x8fffffff], 512MB [0xa0000000,
> > > > 0xafffffff], 1024MB [0xc0000000, 0xcfffffff]
> > > >
> > > > I use JTAG to confirm it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Peng.
> > > > >
> > > > > >  };
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  static const struct imx_rproc_att imx_rproc_att_imx8qm[] = {
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 2.37.1
> > > > > >