Hi Peng,
Am 2020-03-07 03:09, schrieb Peng Ma:
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: 2020年3月7日 4:54
To: dmaengine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>;
Mark
Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Leo
Li
<leoyang.li@xxxxxxx>; Peng Ma <peng.ma@xxxxxxx>; Michael Walle
<michael@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXT] [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: ls1028a: add "fsl,vf610-edma"
compatible
Caution: EXT Email
The bootloader does the IOMMU fixup and dynamically adds the "iommus"
property to devices according to its compatible string. In case of the
eDMA
controller this property is missing. Add it. After that the IOMMU will
work with
the eDMA core.
Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
index b152fa90cf5c..aa467bff2209 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
@@ -447,7 +447,7 @@
edma0: dma-controller@22c0000 {
#dma-cells = <2>;
- compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-edma";
+ compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-edma",
+ "fsl,vf610-edma";
Hi Michael,
You should change it on bootloader instead of kernel, Some Reg of
LS1028a is different
from others, So we used compatible "fsl,ls1028a-edm" to distinguish "
fsl,vf610-edma".
Yes this might be the right thing to do. So since it is NXPs bootloader
feel free to fix that ;) Looking at the u-boot code right now, I don't
even know it that is the right fix at all. The fixup code in u-boot is
SoC independent (its in fsl_icid.h and is enabled with CONFIG_LSCH3, ie
your chassis version). For example, the sdhc fixup will scan the nodes
for "compatible = fsl,esdhc", which is also the secondary compatible
for the "ls1028a-esdhc" compatible.
And here is another reason to have it this way: we need backwards
compatibility, the are already boards out there whose bootloader will
fix-up the "old" node. Thus I don't see any other possibilty.
-michael
Thanks,
Peng
reg = <0x0 0x22c0000 0x0 0x10000>,
<0x0 0x22d0000 0x0 0x10000>,
<0x0 0x22e0000 0x0 0x10000>;
--
2.20.1
