On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 14:36:00 +0200 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:07:03 +0800 > "Ramuthevar, Vadivel MuruganX" > <vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>> The question is, is it the same value we have in nand_pa or it is > > >>> different? > > >>> > > >> Different address which is 0xE1400000 NAND_BASE_PHY address. > > > > > > Then why didn't you tell me they didn't match when I suggested to pass > > > > sorry, because you keep asking nand_pa after that only I realized that. > > > > > nand_pa? So now the question is, what does this address represent? > > > > EBU-MODULE > > _________ _______________________ > > | | | |NAND CTRL | > > | FPI BUS |==>| CS0(0x174) | 0xE100 ( 0xE14/0xE1C) NAND_PHY_BASE > > |_________| |_CS1(0x17C)_|__________ | > > > > EBU_CONRTROLLER_BASE : 0xE0F0_0000 > > HSNAND_BASE: 0xE100_0000 > > NAND_CS0: 0xE140_0000 > > NAND_CS1: 0xE1C0_0000 > > > > MEM_REGION_BASE_CS0: 0x17400 (internal to ebu controller ) > > MEM_REGION_BASE_CS1: 0x17C00 > > > > Hm, I wonder if we shouldn't use a 'ranges' property to describe this > address translation. Something like > > ebu@xxx { > ranges = <0x17400000 0xe1400000 0x1000>, > <0x17c00000 0xe1c00000 0x1000>; > reg = <0x17400000>, <0x17c00000>; > reg-names = "cs-0", "cs-1"; > } > > The translated address (0xE1X00000) will be available in res->start, > and the non-translated one (0x17X00000) can be retrieved with > of_get_address(). All you'd have to do then would be calculate the > mask: > > mask = (translated_address & original_address) >> 22; > num_comp_bits = fls(mask); > WARN_ON(mask != GENMASK(num_comp_bits - 1, 0)); > > Which allows you to properly set the ADDR_SEL() register without > relying on some hardcoded values: > > writel(original_address | EBU_ADDR_SEL_REGEN | > EBU_ADDR_COMP_BITS(num_comp_bits), > ebu_host->ebu + EBU_ADDR_SEL(csid)); > > That's quite important if we want to merge the xway NAND driver with > this one. Looks like the translation is done at the FPI bus declaration level (see [1]). We really need to see the big picture to take a wise decision about the bindings. Would you mind pasting your dsti/dts files somewhere? It feels like the NAND controller is a sub-part of a more generic 'memory' controller, in which case the NAND controller should be declared as a child of this generic memory bus (called localbus in [1], but maybe EBU is more accurate). [1]https://github.com/xieyaxiongfly/Atheros_CSI_tool_OpenWRT_src/blob/master/target/linux/lantiq/files-4.14/arch/mips/boot/dts/vr9.dtsi#L162 ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/