[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3a783b8d-4970-663f-816a-15aad5a66a48@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 15:46:03 +0000
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Mikko Perttunen <cyndis@...si.fi>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>,
Ashish Mhetre <amhetre@...dia.com>,
Sameer Pujar <spujar@...dia.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/8] memory: tegra: Add API for retrieving carveout
bounds
On 04/11/2022 15:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/11/2022 11:33, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> Hi Thierry, Krzysztof,
>>
>> On 24/10/2022 14:15, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 11:11:56AM +0300, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
>>>> From: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>
>>>>
>>>> On Tegra234 NVDEC firmware is loaded from a secure carveout, where it
>>>> has been loaded by a bootloader. When booting NVDEC, we need to tell it
>>>> the address of this firmware, which we can determine by checking the
>>>> starting address of the carveout. As such, add an MC API to query the
>>>> bounds of carveouts, and add related information on Tegra234.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v2:
>>>> - Add check for 64-bit phys_addr_t. In practice phys_addr_t
>>>> is always 64 bits where this runs, but it avoids warnings in
>>>> compile test.
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/memory/tegra/mc.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> drivers/memory/tegra/tegra234.c | 5 +++++
>>>> include/soc/tegra/mc.h | 11 +++++++++++
>>>> 3 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> I've applied this to the same tree as the patch that uses it for now.
>>> Let me know if you want me to put this on a separate stable branch for
>>> you to pull in.
>>
>> Any update on this?
>
> What kind of update do you expect?
Ha! I guess I should be more explicit :-)
Well, I would like to see this change in -next and so I was hoping that
you would respond to the above to indicate how you would like to pull
this in.
Cheers!
Jon
--
nvpublic
Powered by blists - more mailing lists