From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 08:12:21 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: OMAP: Remove plat-omap/common.c In-Reply-To: <5097DFD9.5030800@ti.com> References: <20121101224703.2103.95474.stgit@muffinssi.local> <20121101224828.2103.82950.stgit@muffinssi.local> <50936A6E.3020202@ti.com> <5093891D.6070302@ti.com> <50938A69.9040908@ti.com> <20121102154901.GU15766@atomide.com> <20121102185453.GY15766@atomide.com> <50977319.9070902@ti.com> <20121105153632.GH4953@atomide.com> <5097DFD9.5030800@ti.com> Message-ID: <20121105161221.GI4953@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Tomi Valkeinen [121105 07:50]: > On 2012-11-05 17:36, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Tomi Valkeinen [121105 00:06]: > >> On 2012-11-02 20:54, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>>> * Santosh Shilimkar [121102 01:56]: > >>>>> On Friday 02 November 2012 02:19 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > >>>>>> On 2012-11-02 08:38, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Lets not move this in DMA code since the above is really related > >>>>>>> to frame buffer. It reserves more DMA area for dma_alloc_coherent() > >>>>>>> etc than default 2 MB. Infact, we should no longer need this with > >>>>>>> CMA and memblock in place. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Tomi, > >>>>>>> Can we not get rid of the above memory reservation ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, I think so. This one is only used for the old omapfb, i.e. omap1, > >>>>>> and I have no means to test it out, though. But below is a patch to > >>>>>> remove it. I also attached the patch, as it looks like thunderbird wants > >>>>>> to reformat the pasted patch... I'll remove the > >>>>>> CONFIG_FB_OMAP_CONSISTENT_DMA_SIZE from the omapfb driver's Kconfig file > >>>>>> in my tree later. > >>> > >>> Hmm actually, is it safe to remove for omap1, or should we > >>> still keep it around for omap1? > >> > >> Why wouldn't it be safe? Do you mean that CMA doesn't work on omap1, > >> or...? I'm no expert on CMA, but as far as I can see with it's ARM > >> generic stuff. > > > > Just wondering after your comment "This one is only used for the old > > omapfb, i.e. omap1". But sounds like it should no longer be needed > > there either if I parse that right. > > I meant that the code that was moved in the patch "Remove > plat-omap/common.c" is only compiled and ran on omap1, when the old > omapfb has been enabled in the Kconfig. It's not used on omap2+. > > old omapfb uses dma_alloc_*() to allocate memory, so if CMA works on > omap1, I think this code in question can be removed, as done in my patch. OK thanks for clarifying it. Regards, Tony