From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fM8bQ-0006lb-FW for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 25 May 2018 09:01:57 +0000 Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:01:24 +0200 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20180525090124.wchev5lakkiny2gr@pengutronix.de> References: <20180523051012.26148-1-andrew.smirnov@gmail.com> <20180523084341.i5edq2nznd7spbi3@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC] ARM: mmu: Do not try to pick early TTB up To: Andrey Smirnov Cc: Barebox List On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 08:14:40PM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 1:43 AM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:10:12PM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > >> The call to create_flat_mapping() in mmu.c will change both memory > >> type and shareability of all RAM in use by barebox while MMU is on > >> when done in conjunction with CONFIG_MMU_EARLY. > > > > I notice that with MMU_EARLY enabled we call create_flat_mapping() > > twice, once in the early MMU code and once when setting up the MMU for > > real. In between we remap the the SDRAM cached which then is reverted > > during the second call to create_flat_mapping(). > > > > This seems unnecessary. Does the following help you? > > Yeah, this, disabling MMU before or having a tlb_invalidate() after > all seem to help. Your patch works fine, but it has a slight weirdness > in my case because early MMU code would mark OCRAM as cached and > regular MMU code wouldn't undo it without the call to > create_flat_mapping(), so I'd end up with slightly different memory > configuration depending on if EARLY_MMU is enabled or not. Other than > that it should work fine. > > The main reason I chose to go "disable MMU" route is because that > follows what ARMv8 MMU code does, but I am perfectly happy with either > solution. Disabling the MMU probably has a performance impact (I would have to remeasure, maybe this is not true at all), that's why I would prefer keeping it enabled. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox