From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/12] ARM: mvebu: Remove the harcoded BootROM window allocation Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 14:10:21 -0600 Message-ID: <20130618201021.GA11688@obsidianresearch.com> References: <1371554737-25319-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <1371554737-25319-6-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <20130618173906.GC2204@obsidianresearch.com> <20130618194330.GA2394@localhost> <20130618195111.GC6578@obsidianresearch.com> <20130618200240.GB2470@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130618200240.GB2470@localhost> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Ezequiel Garcia Cc: Andrew Lunn , Jason Cooper , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Maen Suleiman , Lior Amsalem , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Sebastian Hesselbarth List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 05:02:42PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > Having the kernel enforce that the DT node is present and at the right > > location, I think, is helpful for the bootloader folks to ensure they > > write correct DTs. > Granted. But then I wonder... why do we bother to put the BootROM in the > DT window if we're going to check for a fixed address it in any case? Code re-use in the mbus driver? Maybe future SOCs in this family will have programmable SMP startup addresses? Non-SMP systems don't need to map the boot rom at all? Jason