[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <82ABE776-0C94-4FAE-BD24-071988842EA9@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 01:41:51 -0600
From: Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
To: "Li Yang-r58472" <LeoLi@...escale.com>
Cc: "Tabi Timur-B04825" <timur@...escale.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ucc_geth: Change private immrbar_virt_to_phys to generic iopa
On Feb 8, 2007, at 1:36 AM, Li Yang-r58472 wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak@...nel.crashing.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 3:16 PM
>> To: Li Yang-r58472
>> Cc: Tabi Timur-B04825; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linuxppc-
>> dev@...abs.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ucc_geth: Change private
>> immrbar_virt_to_phys
> to generic
>> iopa
>>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2007, at 1:06 AM, Li Yang-r58472 wrote:
>>
>>>>> MURAM is a mmio region so it don't share the characteristic of
> main
>>>>> memory that phy_addr = virt_addr - PAGE_OFFSET. While they can
>>>>> both be
>>>>> mapped through page table using iopa().
>>>>
>>>> Right, so when do you know if you'll be using MURAM or normal
>>>> memory? Why not just keep around a token that is the physical
>>>> address at the point you make the decision of MURAM vs normal
> memory.
>>>
>>> Yes, that can be a way. But as the virt to phy mapping is only used
>>> once, it's nothing bad to do it this way.
>>
>> The problem as I stated before with using iopa() is that its not
>> supported across platforms.
>
> Yes, it is only for PPC32. But we don't have another API to do
> it. How
> about make it more generic to add PPC64 version?
Why do you need another API to do this, you already have the
information you want, its just a matter of you keeping track of it.
- k
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists