[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e056170e-75ef-6977-641f-f20e721af9df@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 12:08:31 +0300
From: Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>
To: "Gupta, Puja" <pujag@...eaurora.org>,
Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] firmware: qcom: scm: add iommu scm calls for pg table
Hi Puja,
On 08/24/2016 09:35 PM, Gupta, Puja wrote:
> On 8/19/2016 8:53 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>> Those two scm calls are used to get the size of secure iommu
>> page table and to pass physical memory address for this page
>> table. The calls are used by remoteproc venus driver to load
>> the firmware.
> Do we really need these additional scm calls for venus? why can't we
> just reuse existing __qcom_scm_pas_mem_setup() call?
We are using __qcom_scm_pas_mem_setup() but it will return error if I
did not provide page table memory. At least for apq8016 this step looks
like is mandatory.
Do you have some idea how those iommu calls can be avoided?
--
regards,
Stan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists