[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJtL0HMPxv5vMv2+LOyvyVtYusu3Ja-NikCy2RQSo7f0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:00:17 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/of: Add devm_of_iomap()
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 4:53 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 11:42 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
>> <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>> > There are still quite a few cases where a device might want to get to a
>> > different node of the device-tree, obtain the resources and map them.
>> >
>> > Drivers doing that currently open code the whole thing, which is error
>> > proe.
>> >
>> > We have of_iomap() and of_io_request_and_map() but they both have shortcomings,
>> > such as not returning the size of the resource found (which can be necessary)
>> > and not being "managed".
>> >
>> > This adds a devm_of_iomap() that provides all of these and should probably
>> > replace uses of the above in most drivers.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
>> > ---
>> >
>> > I'm cooking a driver that uses this, if there's no objection I'd like
>> > to carry it in my pull request for that driver (it can also exist in
>> > the DT tree of course). Just let me know.
>>
>> We generally only use of_iomap when there is no struct device for any
>> new driver. Why can't you use devm_ioremap_resource? Is this a
>> non-platform bus device?
>
> This is just a wrapper on devm_ioremap_resource :-) Basically it's a
> "fixed" version of of_iomap, that has the devm* management and will
> mark the resource busy.
>
> My thinking was to then replace most of_iomap users with this.
>
> As for the specific case of the driver I'm cooking, it's a case where
> the SoC contains a little coprocessor (a ColdFire even !) alongside the
Wow. Must be the 1 licensee.
> main ARM core. I have a driver that offloads the bitbanging of some
> GPIOs to it (to implement the FSI bus). I use devm_of_iomap() to map
> the registers of the interrupt controller of the coprocessor, it's not
> really part of the interrupt tree, it doesn't distribute interrupts to
> the ARM or to Linux, it's just a device-node pointed to by a handle.
Accessing another processor's interrupt controller. What could go
wrong with that.
I guess this is fine. There's another problem though. This doesn't
work on Sparc because address.c is not built. I'd suggest moving to
of/device.c or a new file.
> BTW. Another thing that I find a bit annoying is "allocated" reserved-
> memory, there's no API to get to it other than via the DMA APIs or a
> CMA, which is overkill in a few circumstances (such as the one here
> where I just want to dedicate a bit of memory to the coprocessor).
> Right now I'm using a fixed reservation (with a reg property) and go to
> it "manually" but that somewhat sucks.
But that's not really a DT problem. It's a kernel problem if you can't
reserve a contiguous range of unmapped pages. But why not just get
coherent allocation and ignore that it is mapped. That seems better to
me than working around it in DT.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists