[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu9LV_Uh9R84ixqgMRnDTvPtBzT5R-0BHDL=yomBY4E4dg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:41:05 +0000
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: "hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
Mark Langsdorf <mlangsdo@...hat.com>,
"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
"wangyijing@...wei.com" <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"msalter@...hat.com" <msalter@...hat.com>,
"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Charles Garcia-Tobin <Charles.Garcia-Tobin@....com>,
"phoenix.liyi@...wei.com" <phoenix.liyi@...wei.com>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
"jcm@...hat.com" <jcm@...hat.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@...eaurora.org>,
"graeme.gregory@...aro.org" <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 02/21] acpi: fix acpi_os_ioremap for arm64
On 3 February 2015 at 11:37, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 09:08:42AM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> On 2015年02月03日 06:14, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > On Monday, February 02, 2015 08:45:30 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> >> From: Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>
>> >>
>> >> The acpi_os_ioremap() function may be used to map normal RAM or IO
>> >> regions. The current implementation simply uses ioremap_cache(). This
>> >> will work for some architectures, but arm64 ioremap_cache() cannot be
>> >> used to map IO regions which don't support caching. So for arm64, use
>> >> ioremap() for non-RAM regions.
>> >>
>> >> CC: Rafael J Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
>> >> ---
>> >> include/acpi/acpi_io.h | 6 ++++++
>> >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_io.h b/include/acpi/acpi_io.h
>> >> index 444671e..9d573db 100644
>> >> --- a/include/acpi/acpi_io.h
>> >> +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_io.h
>> >> @@ -1,11 +1,17 @@
>> >> #ifndef _ACPI_IO_H_
>> >> #define _ACPI_IO_H_
>> >>
>> >> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>> >> #include <linux/io.h>
>> >>
>> >> static inline void __iomem *acpi_os_ioremap(acpi_physical_address phys,
>> >> acpi_size size)
>> >> {
>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64
>> >> + if (!page_is_ram(phys >> PAGE_SHIFT))
>> >> + return ioremap(phys, size);
>> >> +#endif
>> >
>> > I don't want to see #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 in this file.
>> >
>> > There are multiple examples of how things like this are done. Generally,
>> > the logic is "If the architecture provides its own function for this, use
>> > that one, or use the generic one provided here otherwise."
>>
>> OK. I think weak function would work.
>
> Probably not in a header file. It's better to define acpi_os_ioremap()
> in an arm64 kernel file, together with something like:
>
> #define ARCH_HAS_ACPI_OS_IOREMAP
>
> and the corresponding #ifdef's in the acpi_io.h file.
>
> On arm64 could we make this function call iorema (nocache) all the time?
> We need to clarify the contexts where this is used in the core ACPI
> code. The acpi_map() function for example checks if the page is ram and
> does a kmap(). Do we need to handle the NVS on arm64? AFAICT, we don't
> even compile drivers/acpi/sleep.c in.
>
> Are there other cases where acpi_os_ioremap() is called directly and it
> needs a cacheable mapping?
>
The logic behind acpi_os_ioremap() could be based on the physmem
series I am preparing for 3.21 timeframe.
It allows us to classify physical ranges as backed by RAM or not, and
call the appropriate flavor of ioremap()
--
Ard.
--
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