From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: joerg.roedel@amd.com (Joerg Roedel) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:00:24 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v11 3/3] iommu/exynos: Add iommu driver for Exynos Platforms In-Reply-To: References: <017a01ccfdee$4e5e7a00$eb1b6e00$%cho@samsung.com> <20120312150156.GF18973@amd.com> Message-ID: <20120313100024.GG18973@amd.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 05:50:16PM +0900, KyongHo Cho wrote: > >> +struct sysmmu_drvdata { > >> + ? ? struct device *sysmmu; > >> + ? ? char *dbgname; > >> + ? ? int nsfrs; > >> + ? ? void __iomem **sfrbases; > >> + ? ? struct clk *clk[2]; > >> + ? ? int activations; > >> + ? ? rwlock_t lock; > >> + ? ? struct iommu_domain *domain; > >> + ? ? sysmmu_fault_handler_t fault_handler; > >> + ? ? unsigned long pgtable; > >> + ? ? struct iommu_client client; > >> +}; > > > > Is there any reason why 'struct iommu_client' is a seperate data > > structure? Otherwise it can be merged with 'truct sysmmu_drvdata'. Of course this doesn't need to be changed immediatly. I just asked if there was a specific reason for this seperation. > The problems will be soon fixed and I will post next patch tomorrow. Fine. Please also get the Acked-bys from the Exynos maintainer on patches 1 and 2 at least. I'll merge it then. Joerg -- AMD Operating System Research Center Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach General Managers: Alberto Bozzo Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632