From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: leroy christophe Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: fsl-spi: use of_iomap() to map parameter ram on CPM1 Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 09:00:39 +0100 Message-ID: <54F6BBA7.8040008@c-s.fr> References: <20150226161142.D08681A2360@localhost.localdomain> <20150303184403.GE21293@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150303184403.GE21293@sirena.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org Le 03/03/2015 19:44, Mark Brown a =C3=A9crit : > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 05:11:42PM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: >> On CPM2, the SPI parameter RAM is dynamically allocated in the dualp= ort RAM >> whereas in CPM1, it is statically allocated to a default address wit= h >> capability to relocate it somewhere else via the use of CPM micropat= ch. >> The address of the parameter RAM is given by the boot loader and exp= ected >> to be mapped via of_iomap() > Why are we using of_iomap() rather than a generic I/O mapping functio= n > here? Euh ... because all drivers for powerpc seems to be using of_iomap(), as on=20 powerpc the HW is described by the bootloader in a OF device tree. Today, of_iomap() is at least used in FSL SPI, FSL UART, SPI mpc52xx,=20 UART mpc52xx, i2c-mpc, i2c-cpm, freescale ethernet drivers, etc .... Is it not correct ?