[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110822191335.3dbe99b9@debxo>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 19:13:35 -0700
From: Andres Salomon <dilinger@...ued.net>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Leo Yan <leoy@...vell.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <hzhuang1@...vell.com>,
Jon Nettleton <jon.nettleton@...il.com>,
Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mmp: map sram as MT_MEMORY rather than MT_DEVICE
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 01:07:55 +0100
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -87,7 +88,8 @@ static int __devinit sram_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > info->sram_phys = (phys_addr_t)res->start;
> > info->sram_size = resource_size(res);
> > - info->sram_virt = ioremap(info->sram_phys,
> > info->sram_size);
> > + info->sram_virt = __arm_ioremap(info->sram_phys,
> > info->sram_size,
> > + MT_MEMORY);
>
> Not a good idea fiddling about under the covers like that. The reason
> that MT_MEMORY is not in asm/io.h is to stop it being used like this -
> MT_MEMORY etc are not meant for general purpose use.
>
> It needs to be looked at properly rather than working behind the APIs,
> and making my life a misery by doing so, preventing me from making
> changes where necessary by this kind of back-door use.
>
> I guess we need a new ioremap_xxx() variant to cope with this.
Something like ioremap_exec()? I have no idea what the related MT_
entry would be (as someone who's new to the ARM world, it's not
entirely clear what the semantic distinctions are between the various
MT_ entries).
--
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