Hi Edgar,
On 08/06/2016 01:21, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 07:05:20PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Edgar,
On 03/06/16 14:29, Edgar E. Iglesias wrote:
From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.igles...@xilinx.com>
Add an mmio-sram bus that prevents sram sub areas from
being re-mapped. These sub-areas describe allocations and
not mappings.
mmio-sram is not a bus and the region below should point to a valid physical
address.
So why do you want that?
Hi,
Yes, I briefly mentioned this in the cover letter. It's a hack
to avoid the mapping of sub allocations. The regions under mmio-sram
point to valid addresses but they point into the same space that
the outer mmio-sram node maps in. They also don't need to be page
aligned. AFAICT, Xen should ignore these sub-regions allthough I
think things work anyway (at least with my dts).
Sorry I haven't fully read the cover letter. I agree that going through
those sub-regions are pointless because it already mapped by the parent.
However, it is harmless as they should be part of the parent MMIO. It
also makes the code simpler.
Maybe I should just drop this until we have a real problem or
come up with a nicer way of dealing with this.
Sounds good to me.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
