From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753544AbbBMSkB (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2015 13:40:01 -0500 Received: from pmta2.delivery8.ore.mailhop.org ([54.148.222.11]:45353 "EHLO pmta2.delivery8.ore.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752412AbbBMSj7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2015 13:39:59 -0500 X-Mail-Handler: DuoCircle Outbound SMTP X-Originating-IP: 104.193.169.186 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@duocircle.com (see https://support.duocircle.com/support/solutions/articles/5000540958-duocircle-standard-smtp-abuse-information for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX19idl7Hs+1CxeR8tsDvu7MG Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 10:35:14 -0800 From: Tony Lindgren To: Suman Anna Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen , Kevin Hilman , Dave Gerlach , Robert Tivy , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] remoteproc: add support to handle internal memories Message-ID: <20150213183513.GR2531@atomide.com> References: <1420838519-15669-1-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <1420838519-15669-3-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <20150211205757.GI2531@atomide.com> <54DD131F.8040704@ti.com> <54DE22B4.7020807@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54DE22B4.7020807@ti.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Suman Anna [150213 08:17]: > Ohad, > > On 02/12/2015 11:20 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Suman Anna wrote: > >> My original motivation was that it would only need to be added on > >> firmwares requiring support for loading into internal memories, > >> otherwise, these are something left to be managed by the software > >> running on the remote processor completely, and MPU will not even touch > >> them. > > > > Sure. But even if you guys will use this interface correctly, this > > patch essentially exposes ioremap to user space, which is something we > > generally want to avoid. > > > >> So, let me know if this is a NAK. If so, we have two options - one to go > >> the sram node model where each of them have to be defined separately, > >> and have a specific property in the rproc nodes to be able to get the > >> gen_pool handles. The other one is simply to define these as and > >> use devm_ioremap_resource() (so use DT for defining the regions instead > >> of a resource table entry). > > > > Any approach where these regions are defined explicitly really sounds > > better. If you could look into these two alternatives that would be > > great. > > OK, will do. Meanwhile, can you pick up Patch 1, that is independent of > this patch. If the memory are is hardware specific, then it should be specified in the dts file. If some further configuration depending on the firmware version is needed, then you can parse that from the firmware and make sure it's contained within the hardware specific memory area defined in the dts file. I guess in some cases module options may be also needed. Regards, Tony