On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 03:35:53PM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: > On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 08:42:53AM -0400, Matt Porter wrote: > > > I think the generic SRAM/genalloc driver > > > (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/7/282) > > > could be useful to map the L3RAM on Davinci. > > > With the gen_pool lookup patch (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/7/284) the > > > uio_pruss driver could then use the gen_pool_find_by_phys() (or > > > of_get_named_gen_pool() for initialization from device tree) to > > > retrieve the struct gen_pool*. > > > > > > This way you could avoid handing it over via platform data and you could > > > get rid of arch/arm/mach-davinci/{sram.c,include/mach/sram.h} completely. > > > > I did miss the gen_pool_find_by_phys() call in that series. That does > > look useful. I actually mentioned your series in an earlier posting > > since I like it, > > That I did miss. > > > but since the initialization of the driver was inherently > > tied to DT it's not usable for DaVinci that's just starting to convert > > to DT and needs !DT support as well. > > There should be no dependency on DT in the sram driver. It just requests > and remaps the first given iomem resource and creates a gen_pool from that. > This should work just as well for the !DT case. > Maybe it's just my choice of patch series subject gave you that > impression? If there's a real issue for !DT, I should fix it.
*sigh*, I see now. I looked at v2 and got wrapped up in the DT use case and missed your platform device support. I think it will work just fine for us to use in a "phase 2" of this work, replacing the backend of davinci sram allocation with this as Sekhar seems to be open to. > > I do see it moving to your driver exclusively, but I wanted to make this > > series focused on only getting rid of the private SRAM API using the > > existing pdata framework that's already there. I think once > > gen_pool_find_by_phys() goes upstream we can switch to that and get the > > address from a resource in the !DT case. I guess we should see if Sekhar > > would like to see this happen in two steps or just have us depend on > > the gen_pool_find_by_phys() patch now. > > Thanks, I'm glad you are aware of the sram driver and consider it useful. > > > BTW, I was going to post a patch for your driver to allow > > configurability of the allocation order, but have been busy with other > > things. We'll eventually need that when switching to it as the > > hardcoded page size order isn't going to work for all cases. > > Good point. I think this is the only blocker to DaVinci adopting it once it goes upstream. I can add a patch in your driver thread if that helps. -Matt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
