From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] Support Odroid-XU board (Exynos 5410)
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 22:01:52 +0100
Message-ID: <1409086912.28009.43.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1408490361-308-1-git-send-email-suriyan.r@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1408490361-308-1-git-send-email-suriyan.r@gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Suriyan Ramasami <suriyan.r@gmail.com>
Cc: keir@xen.org, julien.grall@linaro.org, tim@xen.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, jbeulich@suse.com, ian.jackson@citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, 2014-08-19 at 16:19 -0700, Suriyan Ramasami wrote:
> +static int __init exynos5250_smp_init(void)
> +{
> +    return exynos_smp_init(EXYNOS5250_PA_SYSRAM);
> +}
> +
> +static int __init exynos5_smp_init(void)
> +{
> +    struct dt_device_node *node;
> +    u64 sysram_ns_base_addr;
> +    u64 size;
> +    int rc;
> +
> +    node = dt_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "samsung,exynos4210-sysram-ns");


Looking at Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/exynos/smp-sysram.txt
in the Linx tree it seems that this node is supposed to be present on
all systems, including 5250 and it seems to be present in all the DTBs I
can see.

IOW I think exynos5_smp_init and exynos5250_smp_init can just be
exynos5_smp_init (perhaps even folding in exynos_smp_init too).

I'm unsure whether we should fallback to the existing PA_SYSRAM value,
but my initial feeling is that we can get away without.

My only concern is that right now EXYNOS5250_PA_SYSRAM == 0x02020000 but
the DTB contains:

        sysram@02020000 {
[...]
                smp-sysram@0 {
[...]
                smp-sysram@2f000 {
                        compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-sysram-ns";
                        reg = <0x2f000 0x1000>;
                };
        };

IOW I think the final address for the NS sysram will be 0x204f000 and
not 0x2020000. I'm confused how this work{s,ed}. since the DT seem to
suggest that the sysram at 0x2020000 is secure mode, so we can't be
using it.

Ian.