[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100924101208.7916cfa9@udp111988uds.am.freescale.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:12:08 -0500
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
To: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
CC: LEROY Christophe <christophe.leroy@....fr>,
David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi_mpc8xxx: issue with using definition of pram in
Device Tree
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 11:57:40 +0400
Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com> wrote:
> Doesn't explain why that worked on MPC8272 (CPM2) and MPC8560
> (also CPM2) machines though. But here's my guess (I no longer
> have these boards to test it):
>
> On 8272 I used this node:
>
> + spi@4c0 {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> + compatible = "fsl,cpm2-spi", "fsl,spi";
> + reg = <0x11a80 0x40 0x89fc 0x2>;
>
> On that SOC there are two muram data regions 0x0..0x2000 and
> 0x9000..0x9100. Note that we actually don't want "data" regions,
> and the only reason why that worked is that sysdev/cpm_common.c
> maps muram(0)..muram(max).
Wouldn't it still fail the rh_alloc_fixed call?
-Scott
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists