On 02.08.21 12:48, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 8/2/21 11:37 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 02.08.21 02:54, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> On 7/29/21 6:58 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>>> so when did rcar3 introduce something there that shouldn't be >>>>>> reserved? And you had phrased this to me on IRC as about reserving >>>>>> spot >>>>>> for ATAGS, and that not being needed of course on arm64. But that's >>>>>> not >>>>>> what's going on. Perhaps the answer is that rcar3 needs to >>>>>> introduce a >>>>>> board_lmb_reserve to free the normal arch one and provide whatever >>>>>> more >>>>>> narrow scope it needs. >>>>> >>>>> Based on the commit message 2359fa7a878 ("arm: bootm: Disable LMB >>>>> reservation for command line and board info on arm64") , this is >>>>> about ATAGS >>>>> and we really don't need to reserve those on arm64. >>>> >>>> Commit 2359fa7a878 disables the entire arch_lmb_reserve function on >>>> aarch64, yes. I assumed when we had talked that it was a small area >>>> being set aside and perhaps mis-recalled that ATAGS tended to live at >>>> DDR_BASE + 0x800 or so. >>> >>> That arch_lmb_reserve() is responsible for reserving architecture >>> specific memory. On arm32 it is ATAGS, on arm64 it is nothing as far as >>> I can tell (and see below regarding the TLB). >>> >>>> This reservation is not at that spot, and a lot >>>> more than that. >>> >>> Can you please elaborate on this "lot more" part ? Because as much as I >>> studied the reservation code, the "lot more" was ATAGS on arm32 and >>> nothing on arm64. >> >> See my commit log. > > This is not particularly useful answer, considering the commit log says: > "lot of crucial things", "Possibly more", "likely also on other boards" > and other opaque statements. But really, the problem so far happens on > one K3 board.
"Such things are the page table (tlb_addr), relocated U-Boot and the active stack." Jan -- Siemens AG, T RDA IOT Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux