| Message ID | 20201230105005.30492-1-dimitar@dinux.eu (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] remoteproc: pru: Fix loading of GNU Binutils ELF | expand |
On 12/30/20 4:50 AM, Dimitar Dimitrov wrote: > PRU port of GNU Binutils lacks support for separate address spaces. > PRU IRAM addresses are marked with artificial offset to differentiate > them from DRAM addresses. Hence remoteproc must mask IRAM addresses > coming from GNU ELF in order to get the true hardware address. > > Patch was tested on top of latest linux-remoteproc/for-next branch: > commit 4c0943255805 ("Merge branches 'hwspinlock-next', 'rpmsg-next' and 'rproc-next' into for-next")' > > PRU firmware used for testing was the example in: > https://github.com/dinuxbg/pru-gcc-examples/tree/master/blinking-led/pru > > Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> Acked-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> > --- > drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c > index 2667919d76b3..5fad787ba012 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c > @@ -450,6 +450,24 @@ static void *pru_i_da_to_va(struct pru_rproc *pru, u32 da, size_t len) > if (len == 0) > return NULL; > > + /* > + * GNU binutils do not support multiple address spaces. The GNU > + * linker's default linker script places IRAM at an arbitrary high > + * offset, in order to differentiate it from DRAM. Hence we need to > + * strip the artificial offset in the IRAM addresses coming from the > + * ELF file. > + * > + * The TI proprietary linker would never set those higher IRAM address > + * bits anyway. PRU architecture limits the program counter to 16-bit > + * word-address range. This in turn corresponds to 18-bit IRAM > + * byte-address range for ELF. > + * > + * Two more bits are added just in case to make the final 20-bit mask. > + * Idea is to have a safeguard in case TI decides to add banking > + * in future SoCs. > + */ > + da &= 0xfffff; > + > if (da >= PRU_IRAM_DA && > da + len <= PRU_IRAM_DA + pru->mem_regions[PRU_IOMEM_IRAM].size) { > offset = da - PRU_IRAM_DA; >
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c index 2667919d76b3..5fad787ba012 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c @@ -450,6 +450,24 @@ static void *pru_i_da_to_va(struct pru_rproc *pru, u32 da, size_t len) if (len == 0) return NULL; + /* + * GNU binutils do not support multiple address spaces. The GNU + * linker's default linker script places IRAM at an arbitrary high + * offset, in order to differentiate it from DRAM. Hence we need to + * strip the artificial offset in the IRAM addresses coming from the + * ELF file. + * + * The TI proprietary linker would never set those higher IRAM address + * bits anyway. PRU architecture limits the program counter to 16-bit + * word-address range. This in turn corresponds to 18-bit IRAM + * byte-address range for ELF. + * + * Two more bits are added just in case to make the final 20-bit mask. + * Idea is to have a safeguard in case TI decides to add banking + * in future SoCs. + */ + da &= 0xfffff; + if (da >= PRU_IRAM_DA && da + len <= PRU_IRAM_DA + pru->mem_regions[PRU_IOMEM_IRAM].size) { offset = da - PRU_IRAM_DA;
PRU port of GNU Binutils lacks support for separate address spaces. PRU IRAM addresses are marked with artificial offset to differentiate them from DRAM addresses. Hence remoteproc must mask IRAM addresses coming from GNU ELF in order to get the true hardware address. Patch was tested on top of latest linux-remoteproc/for-next branch: commit 4c0943255805 ("Merge branches 'hwspinlock-next', 'rpmsg-next' and 'rproc-next' into for-next")' PRU firmware used for testing was the example in: https://github.com/dinuxbg/pru-gcc-examples/tree/master/blinking-led/pru Signed-off-by: Dimitar Dimitrov <dimitar@dinux.eu> --- drivers/remoteproc/pru_rproc.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)