io_block_mapping & ioremap question

io_block_mapping & ioremap question

[Gutson Daniel-ADG035]

Hi,
	I'm doing some work on 2.6.10, and got this problem:
- there are some io_block_mapping calls in the setup_io_mapping
callback, that use the BATs, and passing same va and pa each one.
Problem arises later when vmallocs gets a a pointer within the mapped
ranges. In other words, seems like the VMM is not aware of the BATs
mapping.

So what I did is: called first ioremap and then io_block_mapping in the
callback thus not hardcoding the va, something like:
	va =3D ioremap(pa, size);
	io_block_mapping(pa, va, size);

Questions:
	1) Is it right?
	2) Should I unmap that address sometime later? (i.e. after
mem_init_done).

Thanks!
	Daniel.

=20
Daniel F. Gutson
Software Engineer
Motorola GSG Argentina
Tel =3D (54)-351-420-9218
Fax =3D (54)-351-420-9202
=20
iProtect Classification
[x] Public
[ ] Internal
[ ] Motorola Confidential Restricted

=20
"we made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place"
- D. Adams

Re: io_block_mapping & ioremap question

[Kumar Gala]

On Apr 15, 2008, at 11:25 AM, Gutson Daniel-ADG035 wrote:
> Hi,
> 	I'm doing some work on 2.6.10, and got this problem:
> - there are some io_block_mapping calls in the setup_io_mapping
> callback, that use the BATs, and passing same va and pa each one.
> Problem arises later when vmallocs gets a a pointer within the mapped
> ranges. In other words, seems like the VMM is not aware of the BATs
> mapping.
>
> So what I did is: called first ioremap and then io_block_mapping in  
> the
> callback thus not hardcoding the va, something like:
> 	va = ioremap(pa, size);
> 	io_block_mapping(pa, va, size);
>
> Questions:
> 	1) Is it right?
> 	2) Should I unmap that address sometime later? (i.e. after
> mem_init_done).

You should look at getting ride of your io_block_mapping calls as  
we've removed that in new kernels.

However, ioremap() should work properly in that it should lookup the  
address you are mapping via p_mapped_by_bats().

- k