Hi Catalin, On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:42:21PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 05:24:27PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> >> Hence add support for an "arm,shared-override" device tree property for >> >> the l2c device node. By specifying this property, affected systems can >> >> indicate that non-cacheable transactions must not be transformed. >> >> >> >> If specified, the actual behavior of the kernel depends on whether CMA >> >> is available or not: >> >> - If CMA is available, nothing needs to be done, as there won't be a >> >> kernel linear mappings and cacheable aliases for the DMA buffers, >> > >> > I don't think this is true. See this thread: >> > >> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-March/329492.html >> >> Doh, and I had hoped to please Russell... >> >> To bad, will drop this. > > You should only drop the "if (dev_get_cma_area(NULL))" check. Of course. > BTW, your patch mentions r2p0. My reading of the PL310 TRM shows this > bit as default from r0p0. Arnd told me he had read the documentation for r0p0 and couldn't find it. The r3p2 manual lists the following changes between r1p0-r2p0: - new behavior linked to the Shared attribute. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
