* Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx> [170907 00:30]: > On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 06:30:57AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > Hi, > > > > * Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@xxxxxxx> [170905 16:32]: > > > I think that I made a mistake for configuration CONFIG_HIGHMEM=y and > > > CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP=y. In this case, the MOVABLE_ZONE can > > > be *!highmem*. Could you check that your configuration have above > > > options? > > > > CONFIG_HIGHMEM is set yeah. > > > > > And, could you check that following patch works for you? > > > > Does not seem to help, tried against next with just 9caf25f996e8 > > revert and also with 9caf25f996e8. > > Oops. I misunderstood your problem. Could you test with > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL? Sure. > After commit 9caf25f996e8, user for CMA memory should use to check > PageHighmem in order to get proper virtual address of the page. If > someone doesn't use it, it is possible to use wrong virtual address > and it then causes the use of wrong physical address. > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL would catch this case. OK, no extra output of current next with CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y. Booting of n900 hangs with just the same error: save_secure_sram() returns 0000ff02 > If it doesn't help, is there a way to test n900 configuration in QEMU? I doubt that QEMU n900 boots in secure mode but instead shows the SoC as general purpose SoC. If so, you'd have to patch the omap3_save_secure_ram_context() to attempt to save secure RAM context in all cases. If that works then debugging with any omap3 board like beagleboard in QEMU should work. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
