On 23/10/2024 14:40, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 10:30 AM Usama Arif <usamaarif642@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 07/10/2024 15:39, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2024 at 9:06 AM Usama Arif <usamaarif642@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 04/10/2024 01:03, Rob Herring wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 12:38:40PM +0100, Usama Arif wrote: >>>>>> __pa() is only intended to be used for linear map addresses and using >>>>>> it for initial_boot_params which is in fixmap for arm64 will give an >>>>>> incorrect value. Hence stash the physical address when it is known at >>>>>> boot time and use it at kexec time instead of converting the virtual >>>>>> address using __pa(). >>>>>> >>>>>> Reported-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Suggested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Usama Arif <usamaarif642@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Fixes: ac10be5cdbfa ("arm64: Use common of_kexec_alloc_and_setup_fdt()") >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c | 8 ++++++++ >>>>>> drivers/of/fdt.c | 6 ++++++ >>>>>> drivers/of/kexec.c | 8 ++++++-- >>>>>> include/linux/of_fdt.h | 2 ++ >>>>>> 4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c >>>>>> index b22d28ec8028..a4d96f5e2e05 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c >>>>>> @@ -194,6 +194,14 @@ static void __init setup_machine_fdt(phys_addr_t dt_phys) >>>>>> /* Early fixups are done, map the FDT as read-only now */ >>>>>> fixmap_remap_fdt(dt_phys, &size, PAGE_KERNEL_RO); >>>>>> >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * Save dt_phys address so that it can be used later for kexec. This >>>>>> + * is done as __pa() is only intended to be used for linear map addresses >>>>>> + * and using it for initial_boot_params which is in fixmap will give an >>>>>> + * incorrect value. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + set_initial_boot_params_pa(dt_phys); >>>>> >>>>> No new arch->dt functions please. If we need to save off the PA, then do >>>>> that when we set initial_boot_params. >>>>> >>>>> Rob >>>> >>>> >>>> initial_boot_params is set in early_init_dt_verify, called by early_init_dt_scan. >>>> This is done in setup_machine_fdt in arm64 where the PA is available, >>>> but in other functions in other architectures, where the PA is not available. >>> >>> Doesn't __pa() work for all the other architectures? That's what your >>> patch indicates. >>> >> >> Yes, __pa() works for all other architectures. >> >> But we would need to add initial_boot_params_pa of type phys_addr_t >> as an argument for early_init_dt_scan, which is called by all other archs, >> and we technically cant use 0 as an invalid value. >> >> We could convert initial_boot_params_pa to void *, and pass NULL for all >> other archs. But again, I don't really think we should be changing the >> early_init_dt_scan(dt_virt) call in all other archs to >> early_init_dt_scan(dt_virt, NULL) just to save initial_boot_params_pa >> in arm64? >> >>>> So it makes it quite messy to set it in the same place as initial_boot_params. >>>> Its only needed for arm64 and making a change in all archs probably isnt a good idea? >>>> >>>> Any reason to not add a new function to make arch -> of/fdt call? >>> >>> Yes. It is the opposite direction I have reworked the interfaces to. >>> We don't want each arch calling various early DT functions at random >>> times and order. That's fragile when the DT functions make assumptions >>> about when they are called or what's been initialized already. >>> >>> Another option is to make arm64 copy the DT as some arches do. >>> >>> Rob >> >> Ah maybe I didn't understand this properly, but isnt early_init_dt_scan an >> arch -> of/fdt interfaces. set_initial_boot_params_pa is a similar interface >> to early_init_dt_scan? > > Yes, and I don't want more APIs if they can be avoided. When is > set_initial_boot_params_pa() supposed to be called? Is it before or > after early_init_dt_scan()? Its only needed in arm64, and can be either before or after, as long as its somewhere in setup_machine_fdt, where dt_phys is available. > Can subsequent OF functions assume the PA > is valid? After set_initial_boot_params_pa has been called, yes. > If an arch doesn't call set_initial_boot_params_pa() is > __pa() valid or did they just forget to call it? Only arm64 seems to do the fixmap as discussed in https://lore.kernel.org/all/1ea5538f-7e96-4034-9af9-e2d5fd72e069@xxxxxxxxx/, so __pa should work in others. Requiring the PA to > be set at the same time as initial_boot_params avoids all those issues > with any period of time having the PA incorrect. > Are you recommending I send a patch which changes all archs to call early_init_dt_scan(dt_virt, NULL)? or maybe early_init_dt_scan(dt_virt, __pa(dt_virt))? and arm to call early_init_dt_scan(dt_virt, dt_phys). Happy to do send a v2 with that if its the way forward, although I feel set_initial_boot_params_pa() in just one arch might be better than changing this for all archs. Thanks Usama > Rob