From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robherring2@gmail.com (Rob Herring) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 02:20:32 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: add early_ioremap support In-Reply-To: <1394037524.5094.35.camel@deneb.redhat.com> References: <1393963738-9210-1-git-send-email-msalter@redhat.com> <1393963738-9210-6-git-send-email-msalter@redhat.com> <1394037524.5094.35.camel@deneb.redhat.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Mark Salter wrote: > On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 17:31 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Mark Salter wrote: >> > Add support for early IO or memory mappings which are needed >> > before the normal ioremap() is usable. This also adds fixmap >> > support for permanent fixed mappings such as that used by the >> > earlyprintk device register region. >> >> One minor comment: >> >> > +enum fixed_addresses { >> > + FIX_EARLYCON, >> >> Can you align this name with x86 and rename to FIX_EARLYCON_MEM_BASE. >> Doing that will help enable the earlycon driver in 8250_early.c. > > Is there any advantage to earlycon=uart8250 vs. earlyprintk=uart8250? Functionally, they are pretty much the same. I'm working on a series to generalize earlycon and then we will be able to delete early_printk.c from arm64 and ultimately share with arm. Doing this alignment just saves a patch to change it later. > I don't mind using FIX_EARLYCON_MEM_BASE, but CONFIG_FIX_EARLYCON_MEM > is X86 only right now and I think changing that should be a separate > patch. Yes, definitely. Rob