Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759338Ab2J0Qwr (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2012 12:52:47 -0400 Received: from co1ehsobe006.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.180.189]:59490 "EHLO co1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753417Ab2J0Qwp convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Oct 2012 12:52:45 -0400 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:62.221.5.235;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:xir-gw1;RD:unknown-62-221-5-235.ipspace.xilinx.com;EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: 7 X-BigFish: VPS7(zz98dI9371I936eI542M1432I4015Izz1202h1d1ah1d2ahzzz30ih95h668h839h944hd24hf0ah119dh1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh1307i1155h) From: Michal Simek To: Josh Cartwright , Nick Bowler CC: "arm@kernel.org" , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , John Linn Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 5/5] zynq: move static peripheral mappings Thread-Topic: [PATCH v4 5/5] zynq: move static peripheral mappings Thread-Index: AQHNsiLZXEqEbirtRkGkwIsBB3utp5fKZliAgAAUHwCAABQlAIAAJ6eAgAKrUFA= Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:52:38 +0000 References: <20121024200222.GA6713@beefymiracle.amer.corp.natinst.com> <20121024200451.GF6713@beefymiracle.amer.corp.natinst.com> <20121025201701.GA18217@elliptictech.com> <20121025212902.GX20593@beefymiracle.amer.corp.natinst.com> <20121025224108.GA30705@elliptictech.com> <20121026010303.GA13669@beefymiracle.amer.corp.natinst.com> In-Reply-To: <20121026010303.GA13669@beefymiracle.amer.corp.natinst.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [172.21.26.65] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 X-RCIS-Action: ALLOW Message-ID: <09a36c6c-af3b-42d2-a58a-a13ee64d9a02@CO1EHSMHS017.ehs.local> X-OriginatorOrg: xilinx.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2493 Lines: 58 HI Josh and Nick, look below. > -----Original Message----- > From: Josh Cartwright [mailto:josh.cartwright@ni.com] > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:03 AM > To: Nick Bowler > Cc: arm@kernel.org; Arnd Bergmann; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm- > kernel@lists.infradead.org; John Linn; Michal Simek > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] zynq: move static peripheral mappings > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 06:41:08PM -0400, Nick Bowler wrote: > > On 2012-10-25 16:29 -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 04:17:01PM -0400, Nick Bowler wrote: > > > > Did you test this on any real hardware? I can't get the ZC702 to > > > > work with the UART mapped at this address (this ends up being > > > > mapped at 0xFEFFF000), although I can't for the life of me figure > > > > out why the virtual address even matters. Note that for the > > > > ZC702, the physical address of the "main" UART is 0xE0001000. > > Good news is you're not crazy; I was able to duplicate the problem here. > > > If I were to guess, I would guess that, except for when it "Works", > > the really really early printk stuff isn't actually hitting the uart > > at all. The "Fails" case would then be due to the stray writes > > crashing the board, and the "Truncated" case due to the stray writes > > being (ostensibly) benign. > > If I'm not mistaken, this hypothesis is predicated on the early bootup code > establishing a (linear?) mapping for addresses > VMALLOC_START; before the > mdesc->map_io() is even handled. That seems odd to me. > > > But I really have no way right now to test this hypothesis, since I > > can't print anything in the failing case. > > Not sure if I'll be able to get anything meaningful out of it yet (I've not > historically had good luck with Xilinx's debugging tools), but I did finally get a > JTAG debugger hooked up to the zc702. I'll see if I can get any useful > information tomorrow. I have seen the same problem on zc702. I will debug it. Josh: the best will be if you can send v5 for patches 1-3 (1 with small changes in dts - uart) which I will apply to arm-next. 4/5 should go out of zynq subtree, it means directly to arm-soc or via Russel's tree. 5/5 + Nick patch should be tested. Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/