Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-19 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:43:36 Brian Norris wrote: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 12:28:38AM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 16:22 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > > > > ...but, does anyone care about XIP / MTD_XIP then, if the first two > > > examples we have both have

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-19 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:43:36 Brian Norris wrote: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 12:28:38AM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 16:22 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > > > > ...but, does anyone care about XIP / MTD_XIP then, if the first two > > > examples we have both have

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-07 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Arnd Bergmann [160304 16:34]: > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:22:03 Brian Norris wrote: > > Hi Arnd, > > > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:19:21AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100,

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-07 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Arnd Bergmann [160304 16:34]: > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:22:03 Brian Norris wrote: > > Hi Arnd, > > > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:19:21AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Saturday 05 March 2016, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Arnd Bergmann writes: > > > I guess we can bring back the macros for the case that MTD_XIP and > > XIP_KERNEL > > are both enabled. > > > > Arnd > I wouldn't have ICMR and ICIP exposed to drivers, Eric's original move looks >

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Saturday 05 March 2016, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Arnd Bergmann writes: > > > I guess we can bring back the macros for the case that MTD_XIP and > > XIP_KERNEL > > are both enabled. > > > > Arnd > I wouldn't have ICMR and ICIP exposed to drivers, Eric's original move looks > corect to me.

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-05 Thread Robert Jarzmik
Arnd Bergmann writes: > I guess we can bring back the macros for the case that MTD_XIP and XIP_KERNEL > are both enabled. > > Arnd I wouldn't have ICMR and ICIP exposed to drivers, Eric's original move looks corect to me. On the other hand, I'm wondering if

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-05 Thread Robert Jarzmik
Arnd Bergmann writes: > I guess we can bring back the macros for the case that MTD_XIP and XIP_KERNEL > are both enabled. > > Arnd I wouldn't have ICMR and ICIP exposed to drivers, Eric's original move looks corect to me. On the other hand, I'm wondering if xip_irqpending(),

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 12:28:38AM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 16:22 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > > ...but, does anyone care about XIP / MTD_XIP then, if the first two > > examples we have both have long-standing build issues? > > I think there are people trying to

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 12:28:38AM +, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 16:22 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > > ...but, does anyone care about XIP / MTD_XIP then, if the first two > > examples we have both have long-standing build issues? > > I think there are people trying to

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:22:03 Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:19:21AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:22:03 Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:19:21AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread David Woodhouse
On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 16:22 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > ...but, does anyone care about XIP / MTD_XIP then, if the first two > examples we have both have long-standing build issues? I think there are people trying to make it work on other platforms, yes. -- David Woodhouse

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread David Woodhouse
On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 16:22 -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > ...but, does anyone care about XIP / MTD_XIP then, if the first two > examples we have both have long-standing build issues? I think there are people trying to make it work on other platforms, yes. -- David Woodhouse

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:10:57 Brian Norris wrote: > 5d284e353eb1 ARM: pxa: avoid accessing interrupt registers directly > > CC drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.o > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c: In function ‘xip_udelay’: > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c:962:35: warning:

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:10:57 Brian Norris wrote: > 5d284e353eb1 ARM: pxa: avoid accessing interrupt registers directly > > CC drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.o > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c: In function ‘xip_udelay’: > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c:962:35: warning:

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
Hi Arnd, On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:19:21AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > > > ELF section because we

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
Hi Arnd, On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 01:19:21AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > > > ELF section because we

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > I know you're travelling, but... > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > > ELF section because we require them to be in RAM

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Friday 04 March 2016 16:02:25 Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > I know you're travelling, but... > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > > ELF section because we require them to be in RAM

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
+ others On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 04:02:25PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > I know you're travelling, but... > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > > ELF section because we require

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
+ others On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 04:02:25PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > Hi Arnd, > > I know you're travelling, but... > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > > ELF section because we require

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
Hi Arnd, I know you're travelling, but... On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > ELF section because we require them to be in RAM whenever we communicate > with the flash chip. However this causes

Re: [PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-03-04 Thread Brian Norris
Hi Arnd, I know you're travelling, but... On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 04:41:50PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data > ELF section because we require them to be in RAM whenever we communicate > with the flash chip. However this causes

[PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-01-25 Thread Arnd Bergmann
When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data ELF section because we require them to be in RAM whenever we communicate with the flash chip. However this causes problems when FTRACE is enabled and gcc emits calls to __gnu_mcount_nc in the function prolog: drivers/built-in.o:

[PATCH] mtd: only use __xipram annotation when XIP_KERNEL is set

2016-01-25 Thread Arnd Bergmann
When XIP_KERNEL is enabled, some functions are defined in the .data ELF section because we require them to be in RAM whenever we communicate with the flash chip. However this causes problems when FTRACE is enabled and gcc emits calls to __gnu_mcount_nc in the function prolog: drivers/built-in.o: