From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lucas Stach Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP4: execute initcall to reserve SRAM for I688 only on OMAP4 Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 18:27:11 +0100 Message-ID: <1448904431.8275.36.camel@pengutronix.de> References: <1447673117-32719-1-git-send-email-l.stach@pengutronix.de> <5649CB16.2030706@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5649CB16.2030706@ti.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Grygorii Strashko Cc: "Menon, Nishanth" , Dave Gerlach , Tony Lindgren , patchwork-lst@pengutronix.de, kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Am Montag, den 16.11.2015, 14:24 +0200 schrieb Grygorii Strashko: > On 11/16/2015 01:25 PM, Lucas Stach wrote: > > omap_interconnect_sync() is the only user of the SRAM scratch area > > allocated in the omap4_sram_init initcall. The interconnect sync is > > used exclusively in the OMAP4 specific WFI implementation, so there > > is no point in allocating the SRAM scratch on other SoC types. > > > > Bail out of the initcall if the kernel is not running on OMAP4 to > > avoid a confusing warning about being unable to allocate the SRAM > > needed for I688 handling. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lucas Stach > > Tested-by: Bastian Stender > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c > > index 949696b6f17b..6db393a30a28 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap4-common.c > > @@ -131,6 +131,9 @@ static int __init omap4_sram_init(void) > > struct device_node *np; > > struct gen_pool *sram_pool; > > > > + if (!cpu_is_omap44xx()) > > + return 0; > > This one affects on am43xx also > So you are saying this erratum is also present on AM43xx? I wasn't able to deduce this from the information provided by Richard Woodruff. > > > + > > np = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "ti,omap4-mpu"); > > if (!np) > > pr_warn("%s:Unable to allocate sram needed to handle errata I688\n", > > Since all OMAP4+ platforms are now DT based why can't we just return from here silently? > If we are unable to allocate the SRAM needed to work around I688 this is a real error on platforms that expose this erratum, so silently bailing out at this point may obscure a real issue. Regards, Lucas -- Pengutronix e.K. | Lucas Stach | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |