On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 09:22:56PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Friday 06 January 2023 12:25:24 Tom Rini wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 05:45:43PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > On Friday 06 January 2023 10:51:43 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > This reverts commit 777aaaa706bcfe08c284aed06886db7d482af3f8. > > > > > > > > The changes to this generic function, which is intended to help with > > > > 32bit platforms with large amounts of memory has unintended side effects > > > > (which in turn lead to boot failures) on other platforms which were > > > > previously functional. > > > > > > As mentioned previously, unfortunately this revert breaks 32-bit u-boot > > > on 36-bit mpc85xx boards with 32-bit e500v2 cores and 4GB DDR module. > > > > > > Which platforms currently have broken u-boot without this revert? The > > > only one which was reported is stm32mp but for it there different > > > workaround patch waiting in the queue. > > > > Are you able to test on one of these PowerPC platforms currently? As > > the stm32 problem shows, not everything is getting tested frequently > > enough, so how many other cases are lurking out there. And, I think > > overall issue is that the overflow check-and-change you introduce here > > should just be in the CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED==true case. As that's the > > case you're dealing with, yes? > > I was planning to do big retest again after all powerpc patches are > reviewed and merged...
Yes, but can you test one of them now, to see if my idea works? > Anyway, if the issue here is with ram_size and its reduction was needed > for mpc85xx (at the time of introduction of that patch), what about > putting mpc85xx ifdef around ram_size reduction? For arm boards it would > have same behavior as revert of that commit and for mpc85xx it would be > no change. > > I agree that this code needs to be revisited, together with ram_top > issue and also code which fills DDR banks. Because really mapped memory > for u-boot and real size of DDR are two different things here. The issue here is that we see two now (given Fabio's reminder about another thread I had forgotten) of unintended consequences, on 32bit platforms trying to normally have 2GB of memory, which does not require special treatment. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
