From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Ferre Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Consolidate SRAM support Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:04:56 +0200 Message-ID: <4DA86CA8.7090104@atmel.com> References: <20110415130607.GM1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4DA85B49.60209@vollmann.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from newsmtp5.atmel.com ([204.2.163.5]:18833 "EHLO sjogate2.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750776Ab1DOQFX (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:05:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4DA85B49.60209@vollmann.ch> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Detlef Vollmann Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , Kevin Hilman , davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com, Tony Lindgren , Sekhar Nori , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Le 15/04/2011 16:50, Detlef Vollmann : > On 04/15/11 15:06, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> This is work in progress. > Thanks, very useful. [..] >> Another question is whether we should allow multiple SRAM pools or not - >> this code does allow multiple pools, but so far we only have one pool >> per SoC. Overdesign? Maybe, but it prevents SoCs wanting to duplicate >> it if they want to partition the SRAM, or have peripheral-local SRAMs. > Having the option to partition the SRAM is probably useful. > What I'm missing is sram_pool_add: on AT91SAM9G20 you have two banks > of SRAM, and you might want to combine them into a single pool. In fact on at91sam9g20 (and some other at91) you can use the mirroring of the SRAM until next bank... so you end up with a single pool. Base @ sram1 base - sram0 size size = sram 0 size + sram 1 size Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.ferre@atmel.com (Nicolas Ferre) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:04:56 +0200 Subject: [RFC PATCH] Consolidate SRAM support In-Reply-To: <4DA85B49.60209@vollmann.ch> References: <20110415130607.GM1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4DA85B49.60209@vollmann.ch> Message-ID: <4DA86CA8.7090104@atmel.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Le 15/04/2011 16:50, Detlef Vollmann : > On 04/15/11 15:06, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> This is work in progress. > Thanks, very useful. [..] >> Another question is whether we should allow multiple SRAM pools or not - >> this code does allow multiple pools, but so far we only have one pool >> per SoC. Overdesign? Maybe, but it prevents SoCs wanting to duplicate >> it if they want to partition the SRAM, or have peripheral-local SRAMs. > Having the option to partition the SRAM is probably useful. > What I'm missing is sram_pool_add: on AT91SAM9G20 you have two banks > of SRAM, and you might want to combine them into a single pool. In fact on at91sam9g20 (and some other at91) you can use the mirroring of the SRAM until next bank... so you end up with a single pool. Base @ sram1 base - sram0 size size = sram 0 size + sram 1 size Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre