Hi Thor, On 12/07/2019 19:28, thor.tha...@linux.intel.com wrote: > From: Thor Thayer <thor.tha...@linux.intel.com> > > ARM32 SoCFPGAs had separate IRQs for SDRAM. ARM64 SoCFPGAs > send all DBEs to SError so filtering by source is necessary. > > The Stratix10 SDRAM ECC is a better match with the generic > Altera peripheral ECC framework because the linked list can > be searched to find the ECC block offset and printout > the DBE Address.
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c > index c2e693e34d43..09a80b53acea 100644 > --- a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c > +++ b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c > @@ -2231,13 +2275,15 @@ static int altr_edac_a10_probe(struct platform_device > *pdev) > of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-dma-ecc") || > of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-usb-ecc") || > of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-qspi-ecc") || > +#ifdef CONFIG_EDAC_ALTERA_SDRAM > + of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,sdram-edac-s10") || > +#endif > of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,socfpga-sdmmc-ecc")) I'm just curious: This list looks suspiciously like the altr_edac_a10_device_of_match[] list. Is there a reason it can't use of_match_device() here? > > altr_edac_a10_device_add(edac, child); > > #ifdef CONFIG_EDAC_ALTERA_SDRAM > - else if ((of_device_is_compatible(child, > "altr,sdram-edac-a10")) || > - (of_device_is_compatible(child, > "altr,sdram-edac-s10"))) > + else if (of_device_is_compatible(child, "altr,sdram-edac-a10")) > of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, > altr_sdram_ctrl_of_match, > NULL, &pdev->dev); Acked-by: James Morse <james.mo...@arm.com> Thanks, James
