[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151014222022.GL10113@atomide.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:20:23 -0700
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Heiko Schocher <hs@...x.de>
Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Georg.Soffel@...ch-si.com,
Ayoub Zaki <Ayoub.Zaki@...ch-si.com>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm, omap2, sram: On HS/EMU devices, only 64K internal
SRAM is available.
* Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [151014 10:56]:
> * Heiko Schocher <hs@...x.de> [151012 22:58]:
> > Of this, secure content (including PPA) uses initial
> > portion of the SRAM. This chunk is not (and shouldn't
> > be) accessible from the public code.
> >
> > The minimum size of this chunk (0x350) is used in this
> > patch. Available size is rounded off to 63K.
> >
> > Both values would require a change if size of secure
> > content grows beyond 0x350.
>
> Makes sense to me. And something similar is needed at least for
> dm814x to get rid of the imprecise abort during boot with
> commit bbeb92095159 ("ARM: 8422/1: enable imprecise aborts during
> early kernel startup") applied.
>
> Is this needed as a fix to the -rc cycle, or can this wait for
> v4.4?
Actually I think we may have a regression somwhere. If you look
at commit 8b9a2810b02e ("ARM: OMAP4+: Move SRAM data to DT")
this should all be handled by drivers/misc/sram.c nowadays.
So for most SoCs, we should completely skip the plat-omap/sram.c
code.
Regards,
Tony
--
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