From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <redacted>
---
arch/arm/Kconfig | 1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <hidden> Date: 2011-08-10 09:16:35
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
From: Will Deacon <hidden> Date: 2011-08-10 09:22:06
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Will
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <hidden> Date: 2011-08-10 09:29:55
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:22:06AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Maybe also making the option hidden depending on EXPERT, or even EMBEDDED
would be a good idea too. I think it falls into at least the same class
as UID16, sysctl, hotplug, printk, etc. which are all EXPERT options.
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. ?This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. ?Anyone have any objections?
I agree, no objections. Works flawlessly on all my systems.
Thanks,
Linus Walleij
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <hidden> Date: 2011-08-11 08:24:13
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:29:55AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:22:06AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Maybe also making the option hidden depending on EXPERT, or even EMBEDDED
would be a good idea too. I think it falls into at least the same class
as UID16, sysctl, hotplug, printk, etc. which are all EXPERT options.
Right, I'm now committing a patch to hide the option unless EMBEDDED
is enabled. I think this means we should get rid of the 'select
ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT' statements from the various platforms, so that
folk can optimize away that code if they know what they're doing.
Note: this patch will conflict with the removal of the 16-bit P2V
patching, so we need to sort that out.
8<---------
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
ARM: enable ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT by default
Enable virtual to physical translation patching by default in all
kernels. Hide the option behind EMBEDDED.
This can still be turned off if people desire, and they know what
they're doing, to shrink the size of the kernel to a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <redacted>
---
arch/arm/Kconfig | 8 ++++++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
@@ -195,7 +195,8 @@ config VECTORS_BASEThebaseaddressofexceptionvectors.configARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT-bool"Patch physical to virtual translations at runtime"+bool"Patch physical to virtual translations at runtime"ifEMBEDDED+defaultydepends on!XIP_KERNEL&&MMUdepends on!ARCH_REALVIEW||!SPARSEMEMhelp
Hi Russell,
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:24:13AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:29:55AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:22:06AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Maybe also making the option hidden depending on EXPERT, or even EMBEDDED
would be a good idea too. I think it falls into at least the same class
as UID16, sysctl, hotplug, printk, etc. which are all EXPERT options.
Right, I'm now committing a patch to hide the option unless EMBEDDED
is enabled. I think this means we should get rid of the 'select
ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT' statements from the various platforms, so that
folk can optimize away that code if they know what they're doing.
Note: this patch will conflict with the removal of the 16-bit P2V
patching, so we need to sort that out.
8<---------
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
ARM: enable ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT by default
Enable virtual to physical translation patching by default in all
kernels. Hide the option behind EMBEDDED.
This can still be turned off if people desire, and they know what
they're doing, to shrink the size of the kernel to a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <redacted>
[snip]
+ Only disable this option if you know what you do not require
+ this feature (eg, building a kernel for a single machine) and
+ you need to shrink the kernel to the minimal size.
The word 'what' in this statement looks redundant.
baruch
--
~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <hidden> Date: 2011-08-11 08:37:17
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 11:32:44AM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:
Hi Russell,
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:24:13AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:29:55AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:22:06AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Maybe also making the option hidden depending on EXPERT, or even EMBEDDED
would be a good idea too. I think it falls into at least the same class
as UID16, sysctl, hotplug, printk, etc. which are all EXPERT options.
Right, I'm now committing a patch to hide the option unless EMBEDDED
is enabled. I think this means we should get rid of the 'select
ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT' statements from the various platforms, so that
folk can optimize away that code if they know what they're doing.
Note: this patch will conflict with the removal of the 16-bit P2V
patching, so we need to sort that out.
8<---------
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
ARM: enable ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT by default
Enable virtual to physical translation patching by default in all
kernels. Hide the option behind EMBEDDED.
This can still be turned off if people desire, and they know what
they're doing, to shrink the size of the kernel to a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <redacted>
[snip]
quoted
+ Only disable this option if you know what you do not require
+ this feature (eg, building a kernel for a single machine) and
+ you need to shrink the kernel to the minimal size.
The word 'what' in this statement looks redundant.
From: Will Deacon <hidden> Date: 2011-08-11 08:46:26
Hi Russell,
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:24:13AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Right, I'm now committing a patch to hide the option unless EMBEDDED
is enabled. I think this means we should get rid of the 'select
ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT' statements from the various platforms, so that
folk can optimize away that code if they know what they're doing.
Note: this patch will conflict with the removal of the 16-bit P2V
patching, so we need to sort that out.
8<---------
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
ARM: enable ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT by default
Enable virtual to physical translation patching by default in all
kernels. Hide the option behind EMBEDDED.
This can still be turned off if people desire, and they know what
they're doing, to shrink the size of the kernel to a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <redacted>
---
arch/arm/Kconfig | 8 ++++++--
1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
With the typo fix, you can have my ack if you like:
Acked-by: Will Deacon <redacted>
Cheers,
Will
On 09:24 Thu 11 Aug , Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:29:55AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:22:06AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Maybe also making the option hidden depending on EXPERT, or even EMBEDDED
would be a good idea too. I think it falls into at least the same class
as UID16, sysctl, hotplug, printk, etc. which are all EXPERT options.
Right, I'm now committing a patch to hide the option unless EMBEDDED
is enabled. I think this means we should get rid of the 'select
ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT' statements from the various platforms, so that
folk can optimize away that code if they know what they're doing.
Note: this patch will conflict with the removal of the 16-bit P2V
patching, so we need to sort that out.
8<---------
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <redacted>
ARM: enable ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT by default
Enable virtual to physical translation patching by default in all
kernels. Hide the option behind EMBEDDED.
This can still be turned off if people desire, and they know what
they're doing, to shrink the size of the kernel to a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <redacted>
Acked-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <redacted>
Best Regards,
J.
From: Nicolas Pitre <hidden> Date: 2011-08-15 23:20:50
On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
Enable virtual to physical translation patching by default in all
kernels. Hide the option behind EMBEDDED.
This can still be turned off if people desire, and they know what
they're doing, to shrink the size of the kernel to a minimum.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <redacted>
@@ -195,7 +195,8 @@ config VECTORS_BASEThebaseaddressofexceptionvectors.configARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT-bool"Patch physical to virtual translations at runtime"+bool"Patch physical to virtual translations at runtime"ifEMBEDDED+defaultydepends on!XIP_KERNEL&&MMUdepends on!ARCH_REALVIEW||!SPARSEMEMhelp
From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden> Date: 2012-02-06 22:31:47
Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
Hm, another u-boot problem was found[1]. On the affected machines it
prevents booting a compressed kernel (but uncompressed kernels are
fine) unless CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT is disabled or u-boot is
patched.
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
From: Nicolas Pitre <hidden> Date: 2012-02-06 23:16:00
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Will Deacon wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:16:35AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
From: Linus Walleij <redacted>
This works like a charm so I'll just default-select it.
Well, we can remove the EXPERIMENTAL status of this option now. This
raises the question is whether we should now default it to 'y' - I
think we should. Anyone have any objections?
I've been running with this option enabled for the collection of ARM boards
I have and the only problem I have encountered was related to u-boot loading
at the wrong address.
Hm, another u-boot problem was found[1]. On the affected machines it
prevents booting a compressed kernel (but uncompressed kernels are
fine) unless CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT is disabled or u-boot is
patched.
quoted
So I'm all for enabling it by default, especially since it will force out
any remaining issues for boards where this hasn't been used extensively.
Looks like it worked. ;-)
So, what now? Is there anything the kernel can do to work around
this, or should we just live with the regression until people patch
their u-boot?
You really do want to have uboot patched. Who knows what other latent
issues are there that you don't know about.
Nicolas
From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden> Date: 2012-02-06 23:23:29
Nicolas Pitre wrote:
You really do want to have uboot patched. Who knows what other latent
issues are there that you don't know about.
Ah, sorry for the lack of clarity. I don't believe this u-boot patch[1]
has been committed anywhere, so even people with the latest u-boot are
affected. It's just available from the mailing list archive.
"It's not worth working around this bootloader bug" may still be the
right answer. After all, in a couple of months presumably most people
will have the patch applied. And for all I know, it might not even be
possible to work around this bootloader bug, short of flipping the P2V
default again (which seems like a bad idea). I just wanted to make
sure you were aware of it.
Cheers,
Jonathan
[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/124051/focus=124062
From: Ian Campbell <hidden> Date: 2012-02-09 06:34:50
On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 17:23 -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Nicolas Pitre wrote:
quoted
You really do want to have uboot patched. Who knows what other latent
issues are there that you don't know about.
Ah, sorry for the lack of clarity. I don't believe this u-boot patch[1]
has been committed anywhere, so even people with the latest u-boot are
affected. It's just available from the mailing list archive.
FYI it has now been applied to the Marvell u-boot custodian's tree:
git://git.denx.de/u-boot-marvell.git
Ian.
--
Ian Campbell
An evil mind is a great comfort.