On Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 12:45:01 PM, Jingoo Han wrote: > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 10:58 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > > In DRA7, the cpu sees 32bit address, but the pcie controller can see only > > 28bit address. So whenever the cpu issues a read/write request, the 4 > > most significant bits are used by L3 to determine the target controller. > > For example, the cpu reserves 0x2000_0000 - 0x2FFF_FFFF for PCIe > > controller but the PCIe controller will see only (0x000_0000 - > > 0xFFF_FFF). So for programming the outbound translation window the > > *base* should be programmed as 0x000_0000. Whenever we try to write to > > say 0x2000_0000, it will be translated to whatever we have programmed in > > the translation window with base as 0x000_0000. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kis...@ti.com> > > (+cc Pratyush Anand, Marek Vasut, Richard Zhu)
Thanks. > Acked-by: Jingoo Han <jg1....@samsung.com> This patch has no impact on MX6, the mask on MX6 is ~0 . A few comments below ... [...] > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.c > > b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.c index 17ce88f..98b661c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.c > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.c > > @@ -464,6 +464,9 @@ int __init dw_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp) > > > > return -EINVAL; > > > > } > > > > + if (of_property_read_u64(np, "base-mask", &pp->base_mask)) > > + pp->base_mask = ~(0x0ULL); You can just use ~0x0ULL without the () I believe. [...] > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.h > > b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.h index 3063b35..3fa12a6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.h > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.h > > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ struct pcie_port { > > > > struct device *dev; > > u8 root_bus_nr; > > void __iomem *dbi_base; > > > > + u64 base_mask; > > > > u64 cfg0_base; > > void __iomem *va_cfg0_base; > > u64 cfg1_base; This structure contains a lot of slop, check [1] please. We really should be more careful about the structures. I think a separate patch to clean this up would be fine though. [1] http://www.catb.org/esr/structure-packing/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html