From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suman Anna Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: add support to handle internal memories Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:42:45 -0500 Message-ID: <5421A305.1050509@ti.com> References: <1404836521-59637-1-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <1404836521-59637-3-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <53D7F6F3.9020804@ti.com> <54174082.4010008@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ohad Ben-Cohen Cc: Dave Gerlach , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm , Robert Tivy List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Hi Ohad, On 09/23/2014 09:16 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > Hi Suman, > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Suman Anna wrote: >> These processors need to use their internal RAM for loading, which is >> not for generic usage by the kernel, so defining a CMA block for this >> memory doesn't make sense. > > Ok - so just to make sure I understand, this is physical memory you > want to use, which belongs to the remote processor, and which isn't > mapped normally by the kernel? Yes, this is not the regular DDR that is mapped into kernel normally, but is a RAM internal to the remote processor subsystem. The MPU can access it through a bus address/ > >> Will it suffice to replace the memcpy() with memcpy_toio()? > > Yes, memcpy_toio should be fine (and then you don't need to cast the > cookie returned by ioremap). I have posted v2, and have not modified for this. The memcpy portion is actually present in the remoteproc_elf_loader.c, and looks like I need to export some flags from rproc_va_to_da if I were to differentiate this. Is that ok with you? regards Suman From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: s-anna@ti.com (Suman Anna) Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:42:45 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] remoteproc: add support to handle internal memories In-Reply-To: References: <1404836521-59637-1-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <1404836521-59637-3-git-send-email-s-anna@ti.com> <53D7F6F3.9020804@ti.com> <54174082.4010008@ti.com> Message-ID: <5421A305.1050509@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Ohad, On 09/23/2014 09:16 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > Hi Suman, > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Suman Anna wrote: >> These processors need to use their internal RAM for loading, which is >> not for generic usage by the kernel, so defining a CMA block for this >> memory doesn't make sense. > > Ok - so just to make sure I understand, this is physical memory you > want to use, which belongs to the remote processor, and which isn't > mapped normally by the kernel? Yes, this is not the regular DDR that is mapped into kernel normally, but is a RAM internal to the remote processor subsystem. The MPU can access it through a bus address/ > >> Will it suffice to replace the memcpy() with memcpy_toio()? > > Yes, memcpy_toio should be fine (and then you don't need to cast the > cookie returned by ioremap). I have posted v2, and have not modified for this. The memcpy portion is actually present in the remoteproc_elf_loader.c, and looks like I need to export some flags from rproc_va_to_da if I were to differentiate this. Is that ok with you? regards Suman