On 2/6/19 9:04 AM, Roger Quadros wrote: > > > On 05/02/19 18:19, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> * Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@xxxxxx> [190205 16:13]: >>> On 02/05/2019 10:41 AM, Roger Quadros wrote: >>>> What I'm suggesting here is that kernel remoteproc driver should have nothing to do >>>> with the other PRU's data RAM. >>>> >>>> The application driver if needs both PRUs then it can obviously access both DRAMs >>>> as it has a phandle to both PRUs. >>>> >>> That should be fine. >> >> That sounds good to me too. >> >> For dts, yeah please allocate the resources for the modules >> where the resources belong to on the PRUSS internal interconnect :) >> Devices can move around on the interconnect between SoCs and the >> modules can get swapped or added. > > If you take a look at "Figure 30-1. PRU-ICSS Overview" in > http://www.tij.co.jp/jp/lit/ug/spruhz7h/spruhz7h.pdf > > You can see that DRAM0 and DRAM1 are not part of PRU. That means > they shouldn't be in the PRU node then. Yes, they do not belong to a PRU, and should not be defined underneath one. Both are accessible from both PRU cores, so it is upto the application on how they can partition the usage. regards Suman
