Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: support PHYS_OFFSET minimum aligned at 64KiB boundary

2020-09-17 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
On Thu, 17 Sep 2020 at 05:16, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote: > > > > On 2020/9/16 19:15, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > (+ Arnd, Nico) > > > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 05:51, Zhen Lei wrote: > >> > >> Currently, only support the kernels where the base of physical memory is > >> at a 16MiB boundary.

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: support PHYS_OFFSET minimum aligned at 64KiB boundary

2020-09-16 Thread Leizhen (ThunderTown)
On 2020/9/16 19:15, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > (+ Arnd, Nico) > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 05:51, Zhen Lei wrote: >> >> Currently, only support the kernels where the base of physical memory is >> at a 16MiB boundary. Because the add/sub instructions only contains 8bits >> unrotated value. But we

Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: support PHYS_OFFSET minimum aligned at 64KiB boundary

2020-09-16 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
(+ Arnd, Nico) On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 05:51, Zhen Lei wrote: > > Currently, only support the kernels where the base of physical memory is > at a 16MiB boundary. Because the add/sub instructions only contains 8bits > unrotated value. But we can use one more "add/sub" instructions to handle > bits

[PATCH v3 2/2] ARM: support PHYS_OFFSET minimum aligned at 64KiB boundary

2020-09-15 Thread Zhen Lei
Currently, only support the kernels where the base of physical memory is at a 16MiB boundary. Because the add/sub instructions only contains 8bits unrotated value. But we can use one more "add/sub" instructions to handle bits 23-16. The performance will be slightly affected. Since most boards