lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: n900 in next-20170901
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 01:15:30PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> [171110 07:36]:
> > * Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> [171110 06:34]:
> > > On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 07:26:10PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > +#define OMAP34XX_SRAM_PHYS 0x40200000
> > > > +#define OMAP34XX_SRAM_VIRT 0xd0010000
> > > > +#define OMAP34XX_SRAM_SIZE 0x10000
> > >
> > > For my testing environment, vmalloc address space is started at
> > > roughly 0xe0000000 so 0xd0010000 would not be valid.
> >
> > Well we can map it anywhere we want, got any preferences?
>
> Hmm and I'm also wondering what you do to make vmalloc space to
> start at 0xe0000000 instead of 0xd0000000?

Please see the another reply.

>
> The reason I'm asking is because I think we can just move all of
> save_secure_ram_context to run from DDR instead of SRAM. But I'd
> rather do a minimal patch first that fixes your series and then we
> can test the further changes with more time.

Okay. I agree to make a minimal patch first and then go next step.

> After moving save_secure_ram_context to DDR, we can call
> save_secure_ram_context directly with something like:
>
> args_pa = __pa(omap3_secure_ram_storage);
> offset = (unsigned long)omap3_secure_ram_storage - args_pa;
> ret = save_secure_ram_context(args_pa, offset);
>
> > Just that the current save_secure_ram_context uses "high_mask"
> > of 0xffff to translate the address. To make this more flexible,
> > we need the save_secure_ram_context changes too. So we might
> > want to do the static mapping and save_secure_ram_context changes
> > as a single patch.
> >
> > > And, PHYS can be different according to the system type. Maybe either
> > > OMAP3_SRAM_PUB_PA or OMAP3_SRAM_PA. It seems that SIZE and TYPE should
> > > be considered, too. My understanding is correct?
> >
> > We can have a static map for the whole SRAM area, see function
> > __arm_ioremap_pfn_caller() for the comment "Try to reuse one of the
> > static mapping whenever possible". So the different public SRAM start
> > addresses and sizes don't matter there.
>
> And then if save_secure_ram_contet runs in DDR, no static map is
> needed.

Okay.

Thanks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-14 07:36    [W:0.122 / U:13.844 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site