android_kernel_samsung_msm8976/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/mtrr/centaur.c

225 lines
5.3 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <asm/mtrr.h>
#include <asm/msr.h>
#include "mtrr.h"
static struct {
unsigned long high;
unsigned long low;
} centaur_mcr[8];
static u8 centaur_mcr_reserved;
static u8 centaur_mcr_type; /* 0 for winchip, 1 for winchip2 */
/*
* Report boot time MCR setups
*/
static int
[PATCH] i386: fix MTRR code Until not so long ago, there were system log messages pointing to inconsistent MTRR setup of the video frame buffer caused by the way vesafb and X worked. While vesafb was fixed meanwhile, I believe fixing it there only hides a shortcoming in the MTRR code itself, in that that code is not symmetric with respect to the ordering of attempts to set up two (or more) regions where one contains the other. In the current shape, it permits only setting up sub-regions of pre-exisiting ones. The patch below makes this symmetric. While working on that I noticed a few more inconsistencies in that code, namely - use of 'unsigned int' for sizes in many, but not all places (the patch is converting this to use 'unsigned long' everywhere, which specifically might be necessary for x86-64 once a processor supporting more than 44 physical address bits would become available) - the code to correct inconsistent settings during secondary processor startup tried (if necessary) to correct, among other things, the value in IA32_MTRR_DEF_TYPE, however the newly computed value would never get used (i.e. stored in the respective MSR) - the generic range validation code checked that the end of the to-be-added range would be above 1MB; the value checked should have been the start of the range - when contained regions are detected, previously this was allowed only when the old region was uncacheable; this can be symmetric (i.e. the new region can also be uncacheable) and even further as per Intel's documentation write-trough and write-back for either region is also compatible with the respective opposite in the other Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
2006-12-07 01:14:09 +00:00
centaur_get_free_region(unsigned long base, unsigned long size, int replace_reg)
/* [SUMMARY] Get a free MTRR.
<base> The starting (base) address of the region.
<size> The size (in bytes) of the region.
[RETURNS] The index of the region on success, else -1 on error.
*/
{
int i, max;
mtrr_type ltype;
[PATCH] i386: fix MTRR code Until not so long ago, there were system log messages pointing to inconsistent MTRR setup of the video frame buffer caused by the way vesafb and X worked. While vesafb was fixed meanwhile, I believe fixing it there only hides a shortcoming in the MTRR code itself, in that that code is not symmetric with respect to the ordering of attempts to set up two (or more) regions where one contains the other. In the current shape, it permits only setting up sub-regions of pre-exisiting ones. The patch below makes this symmetric. While working on that I noticed a few more inconsistencies in that code, namely - use of 'unsigned int' for sizes in many, but not all places (the patch is converting this to use 'unsigned long' everywhere, which specifically might be necessary for x86-64 once a processor supporting more than 44 physical address bits would become available) - the code to correct inconsistent settings during secondary processor startup tried (if necessary) to correct, among other things, the value in IA32_MTRR_DEF_TYPE, however the newly computed value would never get used (i.e. stored in the respective MSR) - the generic range validation code checked that the end of the to-be-added range would be above 1MB; the value checked should have been the start of the range - when contained regions are detected, previously this was allowed only when the old region was uncacheable; this can be symmetric (i.e. the new region can also be uncacheable) and even further as per Intel's documentation write-trough and write-back for either region is also compatible with the respective opposite in the other Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
2006-12-07 01:14:09 +00:00
unsigned long lbase, lsize;
max = num_var_ranges;
[PATCH] i386: fix MTRR code Until not so long ago, there were system log messages pointing to inconsistent MTRR setup of the video frame buffer caused by the way vesafb and X worked. While vesafb was fixed meanwhile, I believe fixing it there only hides a shortcoming in the MTRR code itself, in that that code is not symmetric with respect to the ordering of attempts to set up two (or more) regions where one contains the other. In the current shape, it permits only setting up sub-regions of pre-exisiting ones. The patch below makes this symmetric. While working on that I noticed a few more inconsistencies in that code, namely - use of 'unsigned int' for sizes in many, but not all places (the patch is converting this to use 'unsigned long' everywhere, which specifically might be necessary for x86-64 once a processor supporting more than 44 physical address bits would become available) - the code to correct inconsistent settings during secondary processor startup tried (if necessary) to correct, among other things, the value in IA32_MTRR_DEF_TYPE, however the newly computed value would never get used (i.e. stored in the respective MSR) - the generic range validation code checked that the end of the to-be-added range would be above 1MB; the value checked should have been the start of the range - when contained regions are detected, previously this was allowed only when the old region was uncacheable; this can be symmetric (i.e. the new region can also be uncacheable) and even further as per Intel's documentation write-trough and write-back for either region is also compatible with the respective opposite in the other Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
2006-12-07 01:14:09 +00:00
if (replace_reg >= 0 && replace_reg < max)
return replace_reg;
for (i = 0; i < max; ++i) {
if (centaur_mcr_reserved & (1 << i))
continue;
mtrr_if->get(i, &lbase, &lsize, &ltype);
if (lsize == 0)
return i;
}
return -ENOSPC;
}
void
mtrr_centaur_report_mcr(int mcr, u32 lo, u32 hi)
{
centaur_mcr[mcr].low = lo;
centaur_mcr[mcr].high = hi;
}
static void
centaur_get_mcr(unsigned int reg, unsigned long *base,
[PATCH] i386: fix MTRR code Until not so long ago, there were system log messages pointing to inconsistent MTRR setup of the video frame buffer caused by the way vesafb and X worked. While vesafb was fixed meanwhile, I believe fixing it there only hides a shortcoming in the MTRR code itself, in that that code is not symmetric with respect to the ordering of attempts to set up two (or more) regions where one contains the other. In the current shape, it permits only setting up sub-regions of pre-exisiting ones. The patch below makes this symmetric. While working on that I noticed a few more inconsistencies in that code, namely - use of 'unsigned int' for sizes in many, but not all places (the patch is converting this to use 'unsigned long' everywhere, which specifically might be necessary for x86-64 once a processor supporting more than 44 physical address bits would become available) - the code to correct inconsistent settings during secondary processor startup tried (if necessary) to correct, among other things, the value in IA32_MTRR_DEF_TYPE, however the newly computed value would never get used (i.e. stored in the respective MSR) - the generic range validation code checked that the end of the to-be-added range would be above 1MB; the value checked should have been the start of the range - when contained regions are detected, previously this was allowed only when the old region was uncacheable; this can be symmetric (i.e. the new region can also be uncacheable) and even further as per Intel's documentation write-trough and write-back for either region is also compatible with the respective opposite in the other Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
2006-12-07 01:14:09 +00:00
unsigned long *size, mtrr_type * type)
{
*base = centaur_mcr[reg].high >> PAGE_SHIFT;
*size = -(centaur_mcr[reg].low & 0xfffff000) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
*type = MTRR_TYPE_WRCOMB; /* If it is there, it is write-combining */
if (centaur_mcr_type == 1 && ((centaur_mcr[reg].low & 31) & 2))
*type = MTRR_TYPE_UNCACHABLE;
if (centaur_mcr_type == 1 && (centaur_mcr[reg].low & 31) == 25)
*type = MTRR_TYPE_WRBACK;
if (centaur_mcr_type == 0 && (centaur_mcr[reg].low & 31) == 31)
*type = MTRR_TYPE_WRBACK;
}
static void centaur_set_mcr(unsigned int reg, unsigned long base,
unsigned long size, mtrr_type type)
{
unsigned long low, high;
if (size == 0) {
/* Disable */
high = low = 0;
} else {
high = base << PAGE_SHIFT;
if (centaur_mcr_type == 0)
low = -size << PAGE_SHIFT | 0x1f; /* only support write-combining... */
else {
if (type == MTRR_TYPE_UNCACHABLE)
low = -size << PAGE_SHIFT | 0x02; /* NC */
else
low = -size << PAGE_SHIFT | 0x09; /* WWO,WC */
}
}
centaur_mcr[reg].high = high;
centaur_mcr[reg].low = low;
wrmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR0 + reg, low, high);
}
#if 0
/*
* Initialise the later (saner) Winchip MCR variant. In this version
* the BIOS can pass us the registers it has used (but not their values)
* and the control register is read/write
*/
static void __init
centaur_mcr1_init(void)
{
unsigned i;
u32 lo, hi;
/* Unfortunately, MCR's are read-only, so there is no way to
* find out what the bios might have done.
*/
rdmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR_CTRL, lo, hi);
if (((lo >> 17) & 7) == 1) { /* Type 1 Winchip2 MCR */
lo &= ~0x1C0; /* clear key */
lo |= 0x040; /* set key to 1 */
wrmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR_CTRL, lo, hi); /* unlock MCR */
}
centaur_mcr_type = 1;
/*
* Clear any unconfigured MCR's.
*/
for (i = 0; i < 8; ++i) {
if (centaur_mcr[i].high == 0 && centaur_mcr[i].low == 0) {
if (!(lo & (1 << (9 + i))))
wrmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR0 + i, 0, 0);
else
/*
* If the BIOS set up an MCR we cannot see it
* but we don't wish to obliterate it
*/
centaur_mcr_reserved |= (1 << i);
}
}
/*
* Throw the main write-combining switch...
* However if OOSTORE is enabled then people have already done far
* cleverer things and we should behave.
*/
lo |= 15; /* Write combine enables */
wrmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR_CTRL, lo, hi);
}
/*
* Initialise the original winchip with read only MCR registers
* no used bitmask for the BIOS to pass on and write only control
*/
static void __init
centaur_mcr0_init(void)
{
unsigned i;
/* Unfortunately, MCR's are read-only, so there is no way to
* find out what the bios might have done.
*/
/* Clear any unconfigured MCR's.
* This way we are sure that the centaur_mcr array contains the actual
* values. The disadvantage is that any BIOS tweaks are thus undone.
*
*/
for (i = 0; i < 8; ++i) {
if (centaur_mcr[i].high == 0 && centaur_mcr[i].low == 0)
wrmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR0 + i, 0, 0);
}
wrmsr(MSR_IDT_MCR_CTRL, 0x01F0001F, 0); /* Write only */
}
/*
* Initialise Winchip series MCR registers
*/
static void __init
centaur_mcr_init(void)
{
struct set_mtrr_context ctxt;
set_mtrr_prepare_save(&ctxt);
set_mtrr_cache_disable(&ctxt);
if (boot_cpu_data.x86_model == 4)
centaur_mcr0_init();
else if (boot_cpu_data.x86_model == 8 || boot_cpu_data.x86_model == 9)
centaur_mcr1_init();
set_mtrr_done(&ctxt);
}
#endif
static int centaur_validate_add_page(unsigned long base,
unsigned long size, unsigned int type)
{
/*
* FIXME: Winchip2 supports uncached
*/
if (type != MTRR_TYPE_WRCOMB &&
(centaur_mcr_type == 0 || type != MTRR_TYPE_UNCACHABLE)) {
printk(KERN_WARNING
"mtrr: only write-combining%s supported\n",
centaur_mcr_type ? " and uncacheable are"
: " is");
return -EINVAL;
}
return 0;
}
static struct mtrr_ops centaur_mtrr_ops = {
.vendor = X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR,
// .init = centaur_mcr_init,
.set = centaur_set_mcr,
.get = centaur_get_mcr,
.get_free_region = centaur_get_free_region,
.validate_add_page = centaur_validate_add_page,
.have_wrcomb = positive_have_wrcomb,
};
int __init centaur_init_mtrr(void)
{
set_mtrr_ops(&centaur_mtrr_ops);
return 0;
}
//arch_initcall(centaur_init_mtrr);