From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 09:10:15 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: imx6q: add support for IRAM In-Reply-To: <20111226134129.GA9014@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> References: <1324898123-13973-1-git-send-email-jason.chen@linaro.org> <20111226134129.GA9014@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> Message-ID: <20120103091015.GD2914@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:41:30PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 07:15:23PM +0800, Jason Chen wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Jason Chen > > Signed-off-by: Eric Miao > > --- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > > arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig | 1 + > > arch/arm/mach-imx/clock-imx6q.c | 3 ++- > > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > > 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi > > index 263e8f3..01646b8 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q.dtsi > > @@ -80,6 +80,13 @@ > > }; > > }; > > > > + ocram at 00900000 { > > + compatible = "fsl,imx6q-iram"; > > It should have nothing specific to imx6q, and could be "fsl,iram". > Then we can have some common code across different SoCs to match it. Why is this even specific to fsl? Isn't it something that could be specified in a totally generic way? As I showed with my original set of sram patches, there is not much specific about this on-board RAM: what is specific is how a SoC uses it, and that's up to the rest of the SoC code.