From: nicolas.ferre@atmel.com (Nicolas Ferre)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL] at91: soc for 3.18 #2
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 16:47:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54257C70.50008@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201409261250.02565.arnd@arndb.de>
On 26/09/2014 12:50, Arnd Bergmann :
> On Monday 22 September 2014, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>
>> Nicolas Ferre (4):
>> ARM: at91: introduce basic SAMA5D4 support
>> ARM: at91: SAMA5D4 SoC detection code and low level routines
>
> This resulted in build failures both in at91x40_defconfig and some
> randconfigs with MMU disabled. I've applied the patch below on top
> to fix it.
Ok, I see: sorry for the inconvenience.
What about taking the patch that I sent about removing completely the
at91x40 as it is "Acked" by everybody now? The would prevent from adding
these unneeded values.
> I'm not exactly happy about the soc detection code anyway after I
> had to look at that. Why do you even hardcode the physical register
> location rather than getting it from DT?
>
> Also, why do you care about which SoC version you have for the
> modern SAMA5 chips? All I see is a sama5d4_map_io() callback
> that maps a lot of completely unused registers along with
> the uart that you normally get from the implicit debug_ll_io_init,
> and the SRAM that should probably be turned into a normal driver.
Yes, as said by Alexandre, we are aware of the flaws of AT91 SoC
initialization, but last time I tried, our code was called too early.
Now with the work from Maxime with the timer (in 3.18) it might be
possible to reorder all this.
But please, I would really like to remove all !DT *and* !CCF material
before starting this work, otherwise we will again have a double path
for sam9's and I'd like to avoid this.
Your thoughts?
Bye,
> 8<-------
>>From 45aeea29c360551519edd8e041b36d8a4d5f6a23 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:27:00 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: at91: fix nommu build regression
>
> The newly introduced support for SAMA5D4 added access to the
> 'AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS' register area, but failed to define the
> symbols in the case when CONFIG_MMU is disabled.
>
> We really should not hardwire addresses like this any more,
> but as a small fixup, this patch just adds the missing
> definitions for the nommu case, which gets at91x40_defconfig
> and any configuration of sam9 and sama5 with MMU disabled
> back to work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 726d32bf79ef4 ("ARM: at91: SAMA5D4 SoC detection code and low ...")
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h b/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h
> index d84776f6b8ac..c13797352688 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h
> @@ -51,11 +51,12 @@
> */
> #define AT91_BASE_SYS 0xffffc000
>
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * On sama5d4 there is no system controller, we map some needed peripherals
> */
> #define AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS 0xfc069000
> -#endif
>
> /*
> * On all at91 have the Advanced Interrupt Controller starts at address
> @@ -90,6 +91,9 @@
> */
> #define AT91_IO_PHYS_BASE AT91_BASE_SYS
> #define AT91_IO_VIRT_BASE IOMEM(AT91_IO_PHYS_BASE)
> +
> +#define AT91_ALT_IO_PHYS_BASE AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS
> +#define AT91_ALT_IO_VIRT_BASE IOMEM(AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS)
> #endif
>
> #define AT91_IO_SIZE (0xFFFFFFFF - AT91_IO_PHYS_BASE + 1)
>
>
--
Nicolas Ferre
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, <arm@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Boris BREZILLON <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] at91: soc for 3.18 #2
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 16:47:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54257C70.50008@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201409261250.02565.arnd@arndb.de>
On 26/09/2014 12:50, Arnd Bergmann :
> On Monday 22 September 2014, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>
>> Nicolas Ferre (4):
>> ARM: at91: introduce basic SAMA5D4 support
>> ARM: at91: SAMA5D4 SoC detection code and low level routines
>
> This resulted in build failures both in at91x40_defconfig and some
> randconfigs with MMU disabled. I've applied the patch below on top
> to fix it.
Ok, I see: sorry for the inconvenience.
What about taking the patch that I sent about removing completely the
at91x40 as it is "Acked" by everybody now? The would prevent from adding
these unneeded values.
> I'm not exactly happy about the soc detection code anyway after I
> had to look at that. Why do you even hardcode the physical register
> location rather than getting it from DT?
>
> Also, why do you care about which SoC version you have for the
> modern SAMA5 chips? All I see is a sama5d4_map_io() callback
> that maps a lot of completely unused registers along with
> the uart that you normally get from the implicit debug_ll_io_init,
> and the SRAM that should probably be turned into a normal driver.
Yes, as said by Alexandre, we are aware of the flaws of AT91 SoC
initialization, but last time I tried, our code was called too early.
Now with the work from Maxime with the timer (in 3.18) it might be
possible to reorder all this.
But please, I would really like to remove all !DT *and* !CCF material
before starting this work, otherwise we will again have a double path
for sam9's and I'd like to avoid this.
Your thoughts?
Bye,
> 8<-------
>>From 45aeea29c360551519edd8e041b36d8a4d5f6a23 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:27:00 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: at91: fix nommu build regression
>
> The newly introduced support for SAMA5D4 added access to the
> 'AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS' register area, but failed to define the
> symbols in the case when CONFIG_MMU is disabled.
>
> We really should not hardwire addresses like this any more,
> but as a small fixup, this patch just adds the missing
> definitions for the nommu case, which gets at91x40_defconfig
> and any configuration of sam9 and sama5 with MMU disabled
> back to work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 726d32bf79ef4 ("ARM: at91: SAMA5D4 SoC detection code and low ...")
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h b/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h
> index d84776f6b8ac..c13797352688 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/include/mach/hardware.h
> @@ -51,11 +51,12 @@
> */
> #define AT91_BASE_SYS 0xffffc000
>
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * On sama5d4 there is no system controller, we map some needed peripherals
> */
> #define AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS 0xfc069000
> -#endif
>
> /*
> * On all at91 have the Advanced Interrupt Controller starts at address
> @@ -90,6 +91,9 @@
> */
> #define AT91_IO_PHYS_BASE AT91_BASE_SYS
> #define AT91_IO_VIRT_BASE IOMEM(AT91_IO_PHYS_BASE)
> +
> +#define AT91_ALT_IO_PHYS_BASE AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS
> +#define AT91_ALT_IO_VIRT_BASE IOMEM(AT91_ALT_BASE_SYS)
> #endif
>
> #define AT91_IO_SIZE (0xFFFFFFFF - AT91_IO_PHYS_BASE + 1)
>
>
--
Nicolas Ferre
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-26 14:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-22 13:15 [GIT PULL] at91: soc for 3.18 #2 Nicolas Ferre
2014-09-22 13:15 ` Nicolas Ferre
2014-09-25 22:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-25 22:17 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 10:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 10:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 13:02 ` Alexandre Belloni
2014-09-26 13:02 ` Alexandre Belloni
2014-09-26 14:47 ` Nicolas Ferre [this message]
2014-09-26 14:47 ` Nicolas Ferre
2014-09-26 18:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-26 18:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-29 8:52 ` Nicolas Ferre
2014-09-29 8:52 ` Nicolas Ferre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54257C70.50008@atmel.com \
--to=nicolas.ferre@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.