[U-Boot] [PATCH 3/6] armv8/mmu: Clean up TCR programming
Albert ARIBAUD
albert.u.boot at aribaud.net
Thu Jul 2 23:06:02 CEST 2015
Hello Marc,
On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 18:13:26 +0000, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier at arm.com>
wrote:
> On 20/03/15 11:47, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com>
> >
> > Use the inner shareable attribute for memory, which makes more sense
> > considering that this code is called when caches are being enabled.
> >
> > While at it, fix the values for the shareability attribute field to
> > match the documentation.
> >
> > Cc: Albert Aribaud <albert.u.boot at aribaud.net>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier at arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h | 8 ++++----
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h
> > index 4b9cb5296572..6d42f5533a74 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/armv8/mmu.h
> > @@ -93,8 +93,8 @@
> > #define TCR_ORGN_WBNWA (3 << 10)
> > #define TCR_ORGN_MASK (3 << 10)
> > #define TCR_SHARED_NON (0 << 12)
> > -#define TCR_SHARED_OUTER (1 << 12)
> > -#define TCR_SHARED_INNER (2 << 12)
> > +#define TCR_SHARED_OUTER (2 << 12)
> > +#define TCR_SHARED_INNER (3 << 12)
> > #define TCR_TG0_4K (0 << 14)
> > #define TCR_TG0_64K (1 << 14)
> > #define TCR_TG0_16K (2 << 14)
> > @@ -102,9 +102,9 @@
> > #define TCR_EL2_IPS_BITS (3 << 16) /* 42 bits physical address */
> > #define TCR_EL3_IPS_BITS (3 << 16) /* 42 bits physical address */
> >
> > -/* PTWs cacheable, inner/outer WBWA and non-shareable */
> > +/* PTWs cacheable, inner/outer WBWA and inner shareable */
> > #define TCR_FLAGS (TCR_TG0_64K | \
> > - TCR_SHARED_NON | \
> > + TCR_SHARED_INNER | \
> > TCR_ORGN_WBWA | \
> > TCR_IRGN_WBWA | \
> > TCR_T0SZ(VA_BITS))
> >
>
> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier at arm.com>
>
> One thing though: the architecture doesn't mandate 64k pages to be
> implemented by the HW. Actually, it doesn't mandate any particular page
> size, you just have to implement at least one (4k, 16k or 64k).
>
> It would be good to test if 64k pages are implemented (by testing
> ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1) and not try to enable caches if not, possibly
> displaying a warning for the unsuspecting u-boot hacker.
So Marc, is this a request for a change, or is the patch applicable as
it is?
Amicalement,
--
Albert.
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list