From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.204]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C9A6823B for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2005 05:58:46 +1000 (EST) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i8so1275996wra for ; Fri, 09 Sep 2005 12:58:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Pantelis Antoniou To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2005 22:59:37 +0300 References: <19EE6EC66973A5408FBE4CB7772F6F0A02FA20CD@ltnmail.xyplex.com> In-Reply-To: <19EE6EC66973A5408FBE4CB7772F6F0A02FA20CD@ltnmail.xyplex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200509092259.37723.pantelis.antoniou@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpm_uart: Made non-console uart work Reply-To: pantelis.antoniou@gmail.com List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Friday 09 September 2005 22:21, Murch, Christopher wrote: > We've recently applied the 2.6.13 patch. We're running on an embedded > platform using 3 of the cpm uart ports on an 8xx cpu. After applying the > 2.6.13 patch the non-console uarts no longer work. Upon investigation, we > have found that cpu2cpm_addr() is giving us invalid results for memory > addresses derived from dma_alloc_coherent(). This causes the cpm to hang. > We believe that the better approach would be to use the dma address > supplied by the call to dma_alloc_coherent() instead of trying to convert > using bus_to_virt() and virt_to_bus(). We believe this is the approach > taken by other drivers in the 2.6 kernel. Any comments? > Thanks for your help. > Yes, it would be proper. This is a temporary hack. What is the IMAP_ADDR value? And where is the consistent pool located at your board? > -Chris > cmurch@mrv.com Regards Pantelis