From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] ARM: vexpress: DT-based support for Cortex-A5 and Cortex-A9 based tiles Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 00:13:20 +0100 Message-ID: <27584177.XzoGq1stOI@wuerfel> References: <1323186229-22054-1-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> <1323186229-22054-6-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> <3527082.WMy5vX2qZB@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3527082.WMy5vX2qZB@wuerfel> 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-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Pawel Moll List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 06 December 2011 23:53:46 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 06 December 2011 15:43:48 Pawel Moll wrote: > > This patch adds Flattened Device Trees based support for ARM Ltd. > > Versatile Express platforms based on Cortex-A5 and Cortex-A9 > > processors. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pawel Moll > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann Actually, I have to take that back. Looking at both patch 5 and 6, the dt-ca*.c files are almost identical and all the differences are about stuff that you can find in the device tree: * The iotable gets initialized from "mrc p15, 4, %0, c15, c0, 0", which would be fine if that worked on all machines, but in order to unify the two files, I would recommend searching the flat device tree for the respective node and only map it if present. * You have two ways of finding out the number of cores, but looking in the device tree would just work either way. * You set the twd_base unconditionally on a5/a9 but never on a7/a15. This looks correct, but you could just as well see if a twd node exists and use its base address. * You only initialize the l2x0 on a5/a9. If a7/a15 don't have a matching l2x0 device, then calling the same function unconditionally should be harmless. Arnd