On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Michal Simek <monstr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> QUESTION: The padding of the DTB is gone, is this OK?
>>
>> Removing this kernel padding should be fine. I can't remember
>> why it was there from the beginning.
>
> I know why is this here. The reason is process how dtb is passed
> to the kernel via command line. head.S code just copy that dtb to
> the same location where compiled-in dts is expected and kernel
> doesn't need to care about position of dtb because this copy is
> done without MMU. And the full kernel is covered by 2 tlbs and
> we don't need to use another TLB for dtb mapping.
>
> It means pad matters a lot. Because u-boot ITS format doesn't use
> simpleImage target but the kernel need to have a space for copying
> dtb to this kernel location.
>
> Let me think about if there is an easy way to handle dtbs
> which are passed from bootloader.
You can add to asm-generic/sections.h:
#ifndef ARCH_DTB_PADDING
#define ARCH_DTB_PADDING
#endif
and change KERNEL_DTB() to:
#define KERNEL_DTB() \
STRUCT_ALIGN(); \
VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__dtb_start) = .; \
*(.dtb.init.rodata) \
ARCH_DTB_PADDING \
VMLINUX_SYMBOL(__dtb_end) = .;
Then microblaze can predefine ARCH_DTB_PADDING in its
<asm/sections.h>.
Still, it will crash badly if the external DTB is larger than
ARCH_DTB_PADDING.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
