From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2948C54EBC for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 17:40:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 140B9854E5; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 18:40:09 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=konsulko.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=konsulko.com header.i=@konsulko.com header.b="fUNUTQVb"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 220F6854F1; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 18:40:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-qt1-x836.google.com (mail-qt1-x836.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::836]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFDE8854D4 for ; Sat, 7 Jan 2023 18:40:03 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=konsulko.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=trini@konsulko.com Received: by mail-qt1-x836.google.com with SMTP id jr11so4693205qtb.7 for ; Sat, 07 Jan 2023 09:40:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=konsulko.com; s=google; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=SnpMYADZyI6BwjIdLhnDzt6yJ8O/5WRm7t+yH74jDvw=; b=fUNUTQVbnpOq5TnBzCbJjAkqZgdMkEYE6UYEZTlodjK4y7G0xcdeRewGUoym3IW3iq aADt/2dMe4kVA+4YFiI2bv74FPHsmOGDsXcwJXR5zVU9Vuo8nRQMItm7MdSw53frgyJu gsIZoPIihu2EmeXtfM551Vn2CNiXXTMvbSfnA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=SnpMYADZyI6BwjIdLhnDzt6yJ8O/5WRm7t+yH74jDvw=; b=wzNkipMJMTzahJGMA89JU4OngK2kmN/OxysaQcCCV/5NMqYKKbeBbRSATScZkGoxk7 9VWSFw5eqKAyvb9hVB0nED5zwLoOYSjKvEOXPGEO38LmLdsxGp1sV/I6uadmdRI3YQ0H dWRnEvIsZyMqtHWWuNRy+kpMbjP61g3SvPQzaRScAGfjXlhNGDKdhqQFc2Au0X81hwWc fJ9a45rEwLfLk0GMJjbafRr3JnNt8roafoziyYcAz9W/5bNOdjJWdt30bVnLHeTNqQ6E T+k/kHN0jXSpoz+NLyIyzWUU5i8xepTo784sz9/WC5r8t+FC1hYpsH1loxMlAez03S8s v15g== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kofKsXo6wh3UAdCNHQcYSmrK2S8ybcQDEZUkuhcQXd06zIy2DVD qcKPjZAUK9cFaDUJCXz1kBgr8fxRFXNa7micTFg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXs4B94FJHhn8R+r3Kg9vnzAT8v3eqCpiORk+ju3TxcJDU7Hc6rN7sff7pk2BFcbR7KmI2vkLA== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:44b8:0:b0:3a8:2fba:b02d with SMTP id a24-20020ac844b8000000b003a82fbab02dmr84391599qto.51.1673113202619; Sat, 07 Jan 2023 09:40:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from bill-the-cat (2603-6081-7b00-6400-64a1-0c30-ebd7-ca7b.res6.spectrum.com. [2603:6081:7b00:6400:64a1:c30:ebd7:ca7b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k2-20020a05620a414200b006faaf6dc55asm2502550qko.22.2023.01.07.09.40.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 07 Jan 2023 09:40:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2023 12:40:00 -0500 From: Tom Rini To: Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de, Marek Vasut , Patrick Delaunay Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "common/memsize.c: Fix get_effective_memsize() to check for overflow" Message-ID: <20230107174000.GP3787616@bill-the-cat> References: <20230106164543.3gtq73flpoocg7mc@pali> <20230106172524.GE3787616@bill-the-cat> <20230106202256.bvjwcfsjbhzsfgrh@pali> <20230106211408.GH3787616@bill-the-cat> <20230106214541.GI3787616@bill-the-cat> <20230106220930.pmdjzmdwyx53ouwv@pali> <20230106225156.GJ3787616@bill-the-cat> <20230107162645.2ygz5rk2tlzmiogw@pali> <20230107173212.GN3787616@bill-the-cat> <20230107173858.yq4frmhkm7ychkp5@pali> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CA/CWqlNGfz/uw0l" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230107173858.yq4frmhkm7ychkp5@pali> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean --CA/CWqlNGfz/uw0l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 at 06:38:58PM +0100, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > On Saturday 07 January 2023 12:32:12 Tom Rini wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 07, 2023 at 05:26:45PM +0100, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > > > On Friday 06 January 2023 17:51:56 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 11:09:30PM +0100, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > > > > > On Friday 06 January 2023 16:45:41 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 04:14:08PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 09:22:56PM +0100, Pali Roh=E1r wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday 06 January 2023 12:25:24 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 05:45:43PM +0100, Pali Roh=E1r wr= ote: > > > > > > > > > > On Friday 06 January 2023 10:51:43 Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit 777aaaa706bcfe08c284aed06886db7d4= 82af3f8. > > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > > > The changes to this generic function, which is intend= ed to help with > > > > > > > > > > > 32bit platforms with large amounts of memory has unin= tended side effects > > > > > > > > > > > (which in turn lead to boot failures) on other platfo= rms which were > > > > > > > > > > > previously functional. > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > > As mentioned previously, unfortunately this revert brea= ks 32-bit u-boot > > > > > > > > > > on 36-bit mpc85xx boards with 32-bit e500v2 cores and 4= GB DDR module. > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > > Which platforms currently have broken u-boot without th= is revert? The > > > > > > > > > > only one which was reported is stm32mp but for it there= different > > > > > > > > > > workaround patch waiting in the queue. > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > > Are you able to test on one of these PowerPC platforms cu= rrently? As > > > > > > > > > the stm32 problem shows, not everything is getting tested= frequently > > > > > > > > > enough, so how many other cases are lurking out there. A= nd, I think > > > > > > > > > overall issue is that the overflow check-and-change you i= ntroduce here > > > > > > > > > should just be in the CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED=3D=3Dtrue cas= e. As that's the > > > > > > > > > case you're dealing with, yes? > > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > I was planning to do big retest again after all powerpc pat= ches are > > > > > > > > reviewed and merged... > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > Yes, but can you test one of them now, to see if my idea work= s? > > > > >=20 > > > > > Ok, I will try to look at during the weekend. > > > >=20 > > > > OK, good, thanks. > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > Anyway, if the issue here is with ram_size and its reductio= n was needed > > > > > > > > for mpc85xx (at the time of introduction of that patch), wh= at about > > > > > > > > putting mpc85xx ifdef around ram_size reduction? For arm bo= ards it would > > > > > > > > have same behavior as revert of that commit and for mpc85xx= it would be > > > > > > > > no change. > > > > >=20 > > > > > This is what I mean: > > > > >=20 > > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_MPC85xx > > > > > if (gd->ram_base + ram_size < gd->ram_base) > > > > > ram_size =3D ...; > > > > > #endif > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > > I agree that this code needs to be revisited, together with= ram_top > > > > > > > > issue and also code which fills DDR banks. Because really m= apped memory > > > > > > > > for u-boot and real size of DDR are two different things he= re. > > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > > The issue here is that we see two now (given Fabio's reminder= about > > > > > > > another thread I had forgotten) of unintended consequences, o= n 32bit > > > > > > > platforms trying to normally have 2GB of memory, which does n= ot require > > > > > > > special treatment. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Running git grep get_effective_memsize and git grep 'gd->ram_top'= shows > > > > > the root of this issue: Different platforms, boards and common co= de use > > > > > these things differently. This needs to be "fixed" =3D unified in= whole > > > > > codebase. We need a function which returns mappable memory for u-= boot > > > > > (intptr_t type is enough) and another function (or structure or > > > > > whatever) which says total size of RAM as u64 type (to ensure tha= t it > > > > > would work also for 4GB SODIMM modules on pure 32-bit platforms).= And > > > > > then each place in u-boot code has to be modified to use the corr= ect > > > > > function. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Second issue is then gd->ram_top. Either say 4GB for 32-bit ram_t= op type > > > > > is not supported or say that zero value is special and represents= 4GB. > > > > > And also every place in u-boot code needs to be adjusted by this > > > > > decision / code. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Fixing both issues make easily break lot of boards (if done impro= perly) > > > > > as it touches whole u-boot code base. So not easy task. > > > > >=20 > > > > > > What I'm leaning towards right now even, is that since it's har= d to test > > > > > > the non-36bit platforms that do set CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED, to s= ee if > > > > > > their behavior also changed here, the 36bit platforms should ju= st be > > > > > > overriding get_effective_memsize. > > > > >=20 > > > > > There are (at least) 3 situation: > > > > > 1) if RAM is mapped to the end of physical address space (possibl= y just > > > > > small e.g. 1GB) > > > > > 2) if platform is >32-bit but running in 32-bit mode (so physical > > > > > address is u64 because we do not have e.g. int36_t; but void* = is > > > > > 32-bit) > > > > > 3) if RAM is exactly 4GB and u-boot is 32-bit > > > > >=20 > > > > > And every one has different edge cases and cause different proble= ms. > > > > > Now, as I pointed above that every platform / board is using > > > > > get_effective_memsize() differently, plus we have CONFIG_MAX_MEM_= MAPPED > > > > > option, it means that number of test matrix is really huge. > > > > >=20 > > > > > It looks like that ARM issues are caused by the fact that RAM is = mapped > > > > > to the end of the physical address space (so it does not matter h= ow big > > > > > or small it is). And powerpc issue is 4GB of RAM together with ru= nning > > > > > in 32-bit mode. > > > > >=20 > > > > > Anyway, has U-Boot support for 32-bit x86 CPUs with PAE support? = If yes, > > > > > then I bet that there can be other edge cases when e.g. 8GB of DD= R is > > > > > connected. > > > >=20 > > > > Yes, it's very much a mess, so for this release I'd like to return = to > > > > either: > > > > - Status quo of v2022.10 (revert this patch) > > > > - Change only CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED being set behavior (should keep > > > > PowerPC 36bit working, may have unexpected impact on other platfo= rms, > > > > still, but very few at least). > > >=20 > > > Yea, it is a mess. I'm looking at the CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED again and= it > > > is for different situation. CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED says maximal mapped > > > memory. For mpc85xx it is by default set to 2GB for a very long time. > > > And if base physical address od the RAM is at 2GB or higher then it a= lso > > > hits this 4GB limit. So CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED does not help there... > >=20 > > Right, it's a mess. So, to try and end up with the least number of > > broken platforms for the coming release, would you rather a full revert, > > or just moving your changes under CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED being set, which > > I believe you're saying is the case for 36bit PowerPC ? >=20 > CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED is by default set for all powerpc boards > (see arch/powerpc/include/asm/config.h) and also for some ARM plat. >=20 > As I suggested above, rather move ram_size modification under > CONFIG_MPC85xx which is set only for powerpc mpc85xx platform which > I tested. >=20 > CONFIG_MAX_MEM_MAPPED option is not too strict as CONFIG_MPC85xx. Right, so which option for the release on Monday do you prefer at this point? We should indeed sort this mess out, for v2023.04. --=20 Tom --CA/CWqlNGfz/uw0l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGzBAABCgAdFiEEGjx/cOCPqxcHgJu/FHw5/5Y0tywFAmO5rnAACgkQFHw5/5Y0 tyylewv/SwhkoQB0zGSbrN+s1dHp921XlEIKreYcS/Vu/lF7uu8POJ9lfFcuvhK3 kM4Wb2OU2NyUUEAdnY2fpcjnKzUNpfxNhgoG5ukDoPXnx5H/o+0KHK+u94laPQYC tv2ue8FCMU7drvs4pditsrhMKsCie9c2M7l41lGS5awjpUwGU35wi42hRcmq6Z9s JUDtWvB1hkEvJ4KWLihx6qpon7oN0769guA53MA/Q41bREN2+qDNlfOuQLtyBDUT Dlxni2fRfscvjH9eEF4IUqetw5FOGnblTzyQU6N83SSswp5KQDz8T1IoXOGmvCN0 UXd5ZjFaRT20SoqlOXoOehZ3XFiCD4HMzrlRR41zyfyz0nfRvp5aBulXj2ScBpPl CWROn34AV7BwQYAcz1mX9ZBL5SWUI/oCbU4x74u0t6buWi7j5f0qQxZKcM65Aqm8 mkQUCqzTHxxdhlOzXfSYlbhqpDz/vBcLUyzII0YJklTKQmq0K2iouy4pivqvMxUO Hady8WFl =xote -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CA/CWqlNGfz/uw0l--